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.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!decvax!decwrl!ucbvax!tcp-ip
From: Geoff@SRI-CSL.ARPA (the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow)
Newsgroups: mod.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re:  Gateway Slots
Message-ID: <[SRI-CSL.ARPA]13-Dec-85.14:21:50.GEOFF>
Date: Fri, 13-Dec-85 17:21:00 EST
Article-I.D.: <[SRI-CSL.ARPA]13-Dec-85.14:21:50.GEOFF>
Posted: Fri Dec 13 17:21:00 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 14-Dec-85 03:38:03 EST
References: <mike@BRL.ARPA>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 21
Approved: tcp-ip@sri-nic.arpa

With respect to gateway slots filling up, can anyone explain, why
in this day and age of endless approvals and OK's from upon high
for the trivialest of things, such as controlling net access down
to the RS-232 terminal port level on TACs its possible for anyone
to just "plug a gateway in" and your up?

it's my impression that to join in the internet club these days you
just find a friendly site that lets you plug into their local net
and you then EGP your existence out to the world.  None of this
paper work "stuff" like you need to do now on enabling a TAC ports
to connect a simple terminal up to!

Can anyone explain why there is such control over hooking
terminals onto TAC's when there is no control over hooking
gateways onto the Internet?

Has anyone dumped the gateway routing tables just to see what the
difference between "who is out there" and "who is authorized to
be connected out there is"?  What prevents anyone else from adding on?

g