Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 SMI; site sun.uucp
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!sun!guy
From: guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: .UUCP domain and "sendmail" configuration file problems
Message-ID: <2841@sun.uucp>
Date: Sun, 29-Sep-85 17:14:02 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.2841
Posted: Sun Sep 29 17:14:02 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 2-Oct-85 21:05:41 EDT
References: <10361@ucbvax.ARPA> <3700008@ndm20>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 55

> NOT EVERYONE RUNS 4BSD ON A VAX!!!

Neither are we, but we have "sendmail" here...

Furthermore, the CCI Power 5/20 doesn't even run 4.2BSD, but it has
"sendmail".  "has sendmail" does not imply "has 4.2BSD", much less "has
4.2BSD on a VAX".  Please stop thinking it does.

Changing the (proposed) domain name because of a sendmail configuration file
problem may or may not be valid.  It depends on how likely it is that people
will fix their configuration files before joining the proposed domain.  The
fact that some sites don't run "sendmail" is totally irrelevant to this
discussion.

> Every proposal that has been made so far about the proper way to address
> and route mail will  require  me  to  retire  my mailer  and run  (and
> probably port myself) something from  elsewhere...

Making a top-level domain out of the UUCP mail network will involve a heck
of a lot of disruption to most sites which join that domain.  They'll have
to have mailers that understand "user@host" syntax and which can figure out
how to get to "host" even if it isn't a UUCP neighbor.  It may be, as some
people say, that it will be impossible to make a domain out of the UUCP mail
network that will satisfy the requirements of the NIC (or whatever group it
is that registers domains).  It may end up that only a subset of the UUCP
sites become members of this new domain (assuming it is created).  If this
is the case, it's a good reason to name it something other than ".UUCP",
since there are a lot of places which assume that ".UUCP" is the collection
of all sites reachable by UUCP.

Other sites should still be able to send mail to and receive mail from sites
in this new domain.  They might be able to do it by mailing to "user@host".
This may require some way of fudging the "From_" line on mail gong from the
".UUMAIL" (or whatever) domain to other UUCP sites so that the full UUCP
path the mail traveled by will be indicated.  It also may be more easier to
exchange mail with non-UUCP sites if you belong to this new domain; i.e.,
"user@host.INTERNETDOMAIN" may work from ".UUMAIL" to the Internet, and
"user@host.UUMAIL" may work from the Internet to ".UUMAIL", whereas you will
have to construct some elaborate path and hope it works for mail between the
Internet and UUCP sites not in the ".UUMAIL" domain.  (For what it's worth,
there seems, at present, to be sufficient chaos in the Internet world, due
to the ".ARPA" -> ".COM/.EDU/.GOV" changeover, that mail that comes from
"user@x.y.z.(COM|EDU|GOV)" can't be mailed back to "x.y.z.(COM|EDU|GOV)" -
you may have to rewrite "x.y.z.(COM|EDU|GOV)" as "mumble.ARPA".)

I suspect the best solution is to set up the domain but not to assume that
every UUCP site will join it.  Permit UUCP mail to work as it always has,
but also permit sites to join the new domain and get whatever benefits it
offers if they're willing to pay whatever costs it requires (installing new
mailers, accepting the authority of the administrator of the subdomain that
they join, whatever).  If nothing else, this should mean that pro-domainists
and anti-domainists won't feel obliged to prove their opponents completely
wrong before the experiment is started.

	Guy Harris


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com