Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ncr-sd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ncr-sd!greg
From: greg@ncr-sd.UUCP (Greg Noel)
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: Hypothetical problem.
Message-ID: <386@ncr-sd.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 9-Jan-86 16:20:39 EST
Article-I.D.: ncr-sd.386
Posted: Thu Jan  9 16:20:39 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 10-Jan-86 05:38:26 EST
References: <383@ncr-sd.UUCP> <3080@sun.uucp> <1878@uwmacc.UUCP>
Reply-To: greg@ncr-sd.UUCP (Greg Noel)
Organization: NCR Corporation, San Diego
Lines: 18

In article <1878@uwmacc.UUCP> ejnorman@uwmacc.UUCP (Eric Norman) asks:
>
>So, how do I know ihnp4 didn't pathalias me through ncr-sd?

Hmmmmmmm......  Interesting question, so I checked the path costs.  It
turns out that I have cheaper paths to four sites in San Diego than if
they were routed through the local backbone (sdcsvax) (I didn't check
other possible relay sites), and identical costs for seven more.  In the
latter case, the choice of relay is made arbitrarily (but consistantly)
so I don't know which is being used.  The bottom line is that if you
sent mail to a San Diego site during the period in question, you should
resend it.

If it helps, ihnp4 called me with six pieces of traffic during those
four days.  I have the UUCP job numbers assigned by ihnp4, but I don't
know if that can be used to trace the actual jobs.
-- 
-- Greg Noel, NCR Rancho Bernardo    Greg@ncr-sd.UUCP or Greg@nosc.ARPA