Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ucsd!rutgers!mcdchg!chinet!les From: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp Subject: Re: Imminent death of UUCP Zone predicted Message-ID: <1990Jul23.185016.7921@chinet.chi.il.us> Date: 23 Jul 90 18:50:16 GMT References: <1990Jul16.202721.271@chinet.chi.il.us> <3143.26a2edd9@mccall.com> Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX Lines: 33 In article <3143.26a2edd9@mccall.com> tp@mccall.com writes: >Has anyone simply refused a link to a broken machine that is not and >end-node? When you get a new link and uucp the news software down to them, >send them smail too, and tell them to get registered. Also tell them that >if they don't get registered, they must remain an end node, or you will >drop your link with them. >I'll get flamed for that, but I think it is a reasonable condition. I can >give links to whoever I want, and I am doing them a favor. I feel I'm >justified in putting conditions on my favors, and I feel that that >particular condition is reasonable, since it is not too tough to get >registered. Implicit in the requirement is my help (as someone who has done >it) to get registered. If you are the primary mail feed to someone else, why not just give them a subdomain under your own domain? No one else needs to get involved at all that way. > 2) If an end-node with dumb mail software generates bad addresses > that people can't reply to, that's also his problem, he won't get > his mail. No, that's not just his own problem. The person sending the reply is also screwed. I don't agree with your terminology of "bad" addresses either. Uucp addressing is self-consistent and not "bad" unless it is passed unmodified to a system that doesn't understand it. Thus the problem is that uucp <-> internet gateways see themselves as simple forwarders instead of doing everything that is needed to correctly make the two systems understand each other. Les Mikesell les@chinet.chi.il.us