Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!dual!ucbvax!kre
From: kre@ucbvax.ARPA (Robert Elz)
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: Name space explosion -- first tremors
Message-ID: <9467@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 29-Jul-85 22:20:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.9467
Posted: Mon Jul 29 22:20:50 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 1-Aug-85 06:26:47 EDT
References: <568@decuac.UUCP> <531@down.FUN> <570@decuac.UUCP> <537@down.FUN> <2968@topaz.ARPA>
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 42
Summary: Abbreviated addresses with domains aren't ambiguous.

The quotes ('>' lines) in this article are from article <2968@topaz.ARPA>,
submitted by hedrick@topaz.ARPA (Chuck Hedrick).
> In that case, we
> will address down!honey as honey@down, until there is another down, at
> which point we will change to honey@down.princeton, etc.  
No no no.  Abbreviated domain addresses mean that the rest of the "local"
domain is appended.  There cannot be "another down" in this case.
If I am on "monet" a host at Berkeley, and I want to mail to "dali",
another host, I can use "mail fred@dali" as the "dali" will be
expanded to "dali.berkeley.edu" - the "berkeley.edu" being the
domain from "monet.berkeley.edu".  Should a "dali" suddenly turn
up at ucla, I can still address Berkeley's as "fred@dali", to
get to the one at ucla I would need to use "fred@dali.ucla.edu"
(or "fred@dali.ucla" - as the ".edu" can be appended from monet's
domain).  It is essential that addresses be a constant for mail
systems to be workable.

> 
> There are certainly advantages to down.princeton over princeton!down.
> It does not specify a route.
Again, no.  This is just syntax.  Neither has any real advantage
over the other, either syntax can be defined with good or bad
semantics.  The semantics was what is important.

> Presumably no one is going to get away with
> having a second UUCP machine called allegra.
This was just what I was saying that I can do with Peter Honeyman's
scheme.  Not only can I have an allegra, I can also have ihnp4,
cbosgd, decvax, and anything else I like.  What's going to stop me???
(Actually, decvax might be a little difficult because of the trademarks,
but lets not get into that can or works here)

I agree with remarks made by Brian Ried, and Fred Avolio.  Mark Horton's
were right too, except it seemed that he implied that there were no
syntax rules in "uucp" style addresses.  That's not true.  They have
rules for what is a legal address just as domain addresses do.  I
didn't bother to point out that the rules might be different, as I didn't
really consider that to be an difference that anyone would really care
about.  As long as there are going to be rules, it doesn't matter a lot
whose set of rules we adopt.

Robert Elz				ucbvax!kre  kre@ucb-vax.berkeley.edu