Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!ihuxl!seifert
From: seifert@ihuxl.UUCP (D.A. Seifert)
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: use of bell.all
Message-ID: <1095@ihuxl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 9-May-84 08:56:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihuxl.1095
Posted: Wed May  9 08:56:56 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 9-May-84 23:50:42 EDT
References: <1721@mit-eddie.UUCP> <654@u1100a.UUCP> <286@sjuvax.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 60

> To get around this, you may wish to mail to someone in Chicago, and
> have them place the message in the appropriate group.  But what if you
> don't know anyone in Chicago? Another case in point is the pa.all 
> distribution that I am part of.  I have yet to see anything appear in
> this.  We are far closer to New Jersey than to (say) Pittsburgh.
> 
> As I have no intention of saying "...I wanna"; I'd like to propose
> a possible solution.  How about setting up a mail alias of
> "wanted" on every system, such that mailing to "wanted" will post the
> article to the smallest possible distribution that the site is a part
> of.  Thus, to post something to chi.wanted, I could just find a site
> in Chicago (via the usenet maps) and mail my letter to 
> .....!<chicago-site>!wanted .
> 
> In fact, I will set up something like that over here for anyone who
> wishes to post to pa.wanted.  (Just give me a week or so till exams
> are over).  I think that this would solve the problem adequately.
> I would appreciate feedback on this.
> 
> 				Binayak Banerjee
> 		{allegra | astrovax | bpa | burdvax}!sjuvax!bbanerje

Good point, in fact I once posted an article in a local
project-related group for someone who was working on the project,
but located in NJ.

There *is* a small problem with defining the "smallest possible
distribution".  If you were to send something to, say ihnp4!wanted,
do you want it posted to "chi.wanted", or the smaller "ih.wanted"
(ih = Indian Hill, goes only to AT&T machines in Chicago area)

If you're going to visit the area and want, say, restaurant
recommendations, you'll want chi.wanted.  If you have some
question about an AT&T product att.wanted or ih.wanted might
be appropriate. (Identifing yourself and your organization, of
course!) I'm sure other companies have similar company.wanted
groups as well. The software could add a warning when posting the
article that it came in through the "wanted login", so that
someone wouldn't give out proprietary info by mistake. Currently
this isn't necessary since only someone within the company can
post to the company.all newsgroups.

Perhaps there could be two or three "logins":
	a.wanted - local area  (e.g. chi.wanted)
	c.wanted - company/college  (e.g. att.wanted)
	ca.wanted - company/local area  ( e.g. ih.wanted)
	
The ca.wanted option would probably be used mostly within
large companies, since outsiders probably wouldn't know
which area to direct their questions to.

The ideas I have expressed above are solely my own, don't
assume that the rest of AT&T agrees. (For one thing, they won't
even know about it until I hit "^z y" and actually post this!)
-- 
	_____
       /_____\	   	    That auto-crossing beagle,
      /_______\			      Snoopy
	|___|		    BMWCCA, Windy City Chapter
    ____|___|_____	       ihnp4!ihuxl!seifert