Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site mprvaxa.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!microsoft!uw-beaver!ubc-visi!mprvaxa!tbray
From: tbray@mprvaxa
Newsgroups: net.bugs.uucp
Subject: Re: uucp must use full system names
Message-ID: <283@mprvaxa.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 12-Sep-83 10:43:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: mprvaxa.283
Posted: Mon Sep 12 10:43:27 1983
Date-Received: Wed, 14-Sep-83 23:38:41 EDT
References: <838@gummo.UUCP>, <307@cbosgd.UUCP>
Organization: Microtel Pacific Research, Burnaby BC
Lines: 16

This is to voice my support for M Horton's point of view.  Backwards
compatibility is in fact a sine qua non of UUCP, and furthermore I feel
that 7 characters is, if not ideal, livable.  I am intimate with the
Bell UUCP code and implementing  full system names would be - uh -
nontrivial.

Also, UUCP has several FAR more glaring deficiencies than the system-naming
rules - to the extent that I question the value of putting band-aids over
little problems like system names.

I speak from the midst of a UUCP port - would be happy to contribute
to a standard. Working without one has contributed to my receding
hairline in past weeks...

			T Bray
			...decvax!microsoft!ubc-vision!mprvaxa!tbray