Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!utcsri!utegc!lamy
From: lamy@utegc.UUCP
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: Status of Canadian domain
Message-ID: <8708221828.AA24999@ephemeral.ai.toronto.edu>
Date: Sat, 22-Aug-87 14:28:26 EDT
Article-I.D.: ephemera.8708221828.AA24999
Posted: Sat Aug 22 14:28:26 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 23-Aug-87 10:15:59 EDT
References: <8708190102.AA05431@ephemeral.ai.toronto.edu> <298@ncrcan.UUCP> <8708211151.AA16007@ephemeral.ai.toronto.edu>
Distribution: can
Organization: University of Toronto, AI group
Lines: 16
Checksum: 61151

In article <54@ncc.UUCP> lyndon@ncc.UUCP (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes:
>I think geographical "domains" are a contradiction in terms. A domain has
>to relate to an address, not a ROUTE.

The geographical position of a site implies nothing about how to get there.
Indeed, it might be the case that a nameserver for .QUE would route mail for
Hull through Toronto and Ottawa.  I was just claiming that kitchen sites
would mostly entertain local connections and keeping administration of
the names closer to the users sounds nice.

I prefer geographical subdomains to "pool" or "park" names like vnet.ca or
netnorth.ca that feel closely tied with a route.

Jean-Francois Lamy                      lamy@ai.toronto.edu (CSnet,UUCP,Bitnet)
AI Group, Dept of Computer Science      lamy@ai.toronto.cdn (EAN X.400)
University of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4   {seismo,watmath}!ai.toronto.edu!lamy