Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!dciem!nrcaer!cognos!glee From: glee@cognos.uucp (Godfrey Lee) Newsgroups: can.general Subject: Re: .bc.ca domain park Message-ID: <1528@cognos.UUCP> Date: Sun, 4-Oct-87 23:56:37 EDT Article-I.D.: cognos.1528 Posted: Sun Oct 4 23:56:37 1987 Date-Received: Fri, 9-Oct-87 01:38:37 EDT References: <8709172332.AA15132@ephemeral.ai.toronto.edu> <8709260429.AA22350@ephemeral.ai.toronto.edu> Reply-To: glee@cognos.UUCP (Godfrey Lee) Distribution: can Organization: Cognos Inc., Ottawa, Canada Lines: 69 In article <8709260429.AA22350@ephemeral.ai.toronto.edu> rayan@utegc.UUCP writes: > Early this summer, it was suggested by a group of you >(at Usenix) to take the discussion public on the basis of a joint position >paper from the network reps. This happened to be rejected, partly on the >basis that it would bring us back to square one, and wouldn't accomplish >anything. I would like to point out that I was there at the meeting at Usenix. It seems to me that there was a number of people there wanting the issue discussed more fully on the net, and I don't remember a consensus then to reject that. I also recall that there was a suggestion which was accepted, which is to take the current proposal, arrived at by whatever group, to the net for a full debate. > I don't agree with the former, but I can understand the latter; >arguing on the net (for example) has rarely accomplished anything but >raising temperatures. It is not the best forum to make decisions in. Decisions cannot be made on the net, but responsible decisions cannot be made without listening to all views, including those of the net. So I don't agree that discussions on the net are pointless. >It is a forum for people to vent their views, as some have done. Sorry for being sarcastic, but how can you have meaningful discussions without different views? > Don't make >the mistake of assuming those views are all there is to it, nor that the >net is representative of (or even reaches) interested parties. For some of us on the uucp net, this is the only forum. We are not privy to the various university networks around, nor do we have access to arpanet. I think the universities are probably the ones with the time and energy to drive this domain effort, but there are us people in the "real" world who are also interested! >I think we'll end up with something reasonably acceptable to most people; >try not to prejudge it. > >rayan I have not pre-judged it so far, and I am still waiting for the results of your efforts. I applaud you for your efforts and your thankless job, but I do think that you seem to have just a bit too strong of a personal bias for someone who is trying to be representing the uucp net population at large. This is just a personal observation, please do not take it as a flame. ===== Now, just to state my PERSONAL view: I really don't care too much about which scheme gets chosen, so long as: 1. There is one scheme. 2. It is simple. 3. Software is provided/available to handle it. The last point is very important, the current software don't work for me. Admittedly I have only spent a couple of weeks at it, got uumail to work, but couldn't tame Sun's sendmail to work with smail. I am no guru, and am generally lazy, so I prefer for someone else to work these things out. I know this sounds selfish, but I suspect I am not alone. -- Godfrey Lee P.O. Box 9707 Cognos Incorporated 3755 Riverside Dr. VOICE: (613) 738-1440 FAX: (613) 738-0002 Ottawa, Ontario UUCP: decvax!utzoo!dciem!nrcaer!cognos!glee CANADA K1G 3Z4