Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!umcp-cs!chris
From: chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: decommissioning of nicknames
Message-ID: <3340@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 9-Sep-86 02:25:05 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.3340
Posted: Tue Sep  9 02:25:05 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 9-Sep-86 06:02:34 EDT
References: <566@mecc.UUCP> <2502@cbosgd.UUCP> <3920@ut-ngp.UUCP> <3945@ut-ngp.UUCP>
Organization: Computer Sci. Dept, U of Maryland, College Park, MD
Lines: 70

In article <3945@ut-ngp.UUCP> werner@ut-ngp.UUCP (Werner Uhrig) writes:
>My argument is that, as long as there is no second site SEISMO on the net
>it is an atrocity for people to get slapped in the face by the mailer which
>all of a sudden disavows knowing SEISMO.

In the domain scheme of things, whether there is one seismo or not
is irrelevant.  Those designing domains decided that this was the
way to go.  When---not if; there is a Final Authority enforcing
the changeover---when the ARPA/MILnet Internet converts completely,
there WILL BE NO HOST TABLE.  It will no longer be possible to tell
whether seismo is unique in the first place.

>And, BTW, what is your image of how the *average* user finds out
>that it is now supposed to be SEISMO.CSS.GOV?

For that matter, how does the average user find out about seismo
in the first place?  (I cannot answer either question.)  This
problem is really the same one: it has just been repeated.  I grant
that this *is* annoying.

>imagine the terror of *ALL* sites dropping their basic alias

This WILL HAPPEN.  (Sorry.)

In this new scheme of things, if I understand aright, you who are
on the host that will be called `ngp.utexas.edu' will be able to
refer to other `.utexas.edu' sites, e.g., the one now known as
ut-sally, using what you might consider your basic alias.  Simply
saying `send mail to jsq@sally' will work for you.  I, in the land
of `.umd.edu', will have to use `mail jsq@sally.utexas.edu'---which
address you too may use.  Indeed, this `fully qualified' name will
work from anywhere in the Internet:  That is its very reason for
existence.

Why the change, if the current system is working so well?  The
answer is that it is *not* working so well.  The pain is well
hidden.  But it is there, at the NIC, where an enourmous and
fast-growing host table must be maintained in a consistent fashion,
and must be distributed to thousands of machines.

>And dealing with the complexity of multiple aliases in a user-friendly
>fashion isn't such a difficult problem either (that is ancient
>problem with several acceptable solutions).  First, if there are
>only few aliases, simple list me a menu of choices to pick from.
>Second, if there are lots of "matches" try to narrow down the "hits"
>by asking for additional info, possibly listing some classification
>keywords.  Sound familiar?

Probably not to those who have not seen Tenex-style completion.
But whether or not it sounds familiar, note that both solutions
are predicated upon a centralised information base.  One cannot
list all possible choices unless one knows all possible choices.
In our case (host names), this centralised database does now exist;
but it is going away: its doom was deemed long ago.  Soon there
will be one small centralised database, and many small distributed
databases, each describing one domain.  Not all will be up at once.
Indeed, given the size and reliability of the Internet, it is likely
that at least one will be down---unreachable---at any given time.

>As the number of users and sites increases we will, of course, approach a
>problem not dissimilar to that of sending UPS-mail today.
>I'll worry about that when we get there, but nothing I have said is any less
>valid in result ....

Alas for you, you may begin worrying now.  Domains are moving in,
and postal mail is the model.
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 1516)
UUCP:	seismo!umcp-cs!chris
CSNet:	chris@umcp-cs		ARPA:	chris@mimsy.umd.edu