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 hadron.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!ucdavis!lll-crg!seismo!rlgvax!hadron!jsdy
From: jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao)
Newsgroups: net.news.config
Subject: Re: Glacier becomes glacier
Message-ID: <113@hadron.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 30-Nov-85 20:47:46 EST
Article-I.D.: hadron.113
Posted: Sat Nov 30 20:47:46 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Dec-85 10:14:12 EST
References: <1626@glacier.ARPA> <629@down.FUN> <794@umd5.UUCP>
Reply-To: jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao)
Organization: Hadron, Inc., Fairfax, VA
Lines: 35
Summary: Politics, politics, politics

The only reasons to have multiple names for a machine are:
(1) politics, (2) a bad technical implementation of name
handling (that can't handle the "true" name of the machine),
(3) politics, and (4) politics.

Machines started calling themselves foo.ARPA and fum.BITNET
as part of the domain concept.  The domain concept, however,
has nothing whatsoever to do with routing.  The idea behind
the domain concept (which you should read in RFC 92?, rather
than taking my word for it) is that each machine should have
a unique name within its subdomain, which ... which should
have a unique name within its own domain.  Any machine may
have a routing table for any other machines, despite number
or lack of common subdomains.  If there is no routing for
the machine, then the sending machine should have a routing
for a routing machine in one of the domains or subdomains,
which latter machine should then be able to route messages
down to the recipient machine.

In other words, UMDU.UMD.EDU is a reasonable name whether
you're routing a machine over BITNET or ARPANET or whatnot,
according to the domain concept.  Any name conversion needed
by the hardware should be done by the software.

Realities include the fact that the domain concept is not
fully implemented, and many sites still do not conform to it
for technical or political reasons or just from lack of
understanding (or caring) about the domain standard.  I
should also mention that not everybody agrees what it means
or that it is good, although most people who have a grasp of
the naming problem agree that It Is a Problem, and Something
Should Be Done About It.
-- 

	Joe Yao		hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP}