Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site rocksvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!rochester!ritcv!rocksvax!dw
From: dw@rocksvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: Uniqueness of Names
Message-ID: <1049@rocksvax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 17-Nov-83 09:52:43 EST
Article-I.D.: rocksvax.1049
Posted: Thu Nov 17 09:52:43 1983
Date-Received: Sat, 19-Nov-83 00:53:00 EST
References: <107@shark.UUCP>
Organization: Xerox, Rochester, N.Y.
Lines: 18

I agree with Dave Clemans that names must only be unique within
a domain.  The question then becomes one of deciding what constitutes
a domain.  Current discussion on the Arpanet seems to be towards
defining a single "uucp" domain.  However, I am beginning to wonder
whether this is the best scheme for us.  Perhaps what is needed
is separate domains, or perhaps a single top level domain for
uucp and a whole bunch of subdomains for different areas, companies,
etc.

My auto-routing software (which only looks at messages which orginate
locally on rocks34) believes that the names of uucp sites are unique.
I have not thought of a beter way to do it under the present situation
of no "officially" defined domains or sub-domains for uucp.

Don Wegeng

{rocks34, rocksvax} !dw
Wegeng.Henr@Parc-Maxc.ARPA