Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!necntc!jeff From: jeff@necntc.NEC.COM (Jeff Janock) Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp Subject: Re: Duplicate site names Message-ID: <12251@necntc.NEC.COM> Date: 28 Dec 87 16:37:39 GMT References: <271@ontenv.UUCP> <7905@g.ms.uky.edu> <44208@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV> <5055@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> Reply-To: nemap@necntc.nec.com (New England Mapping) Organization: NEC Electronics Inc. Natick, MA 01760 Lines: 140 Keywords: pathalias maps duplicates Summary: map entries are checked... In article <271@ontenv.UUCP> norm@ontenv.UUCP (Norman Soley) writes: => I noticed a new site posting for "mickey". The name "mickey" is already => used (by the Disney Company). You say 'The name "mickey" is already used (by the Disney Company).' Does this imply that the name mickey is already in use as a UUCP site hostname? (you do not state this) If it does, then this site "mickey" should have a map entry in the UUCP maps - I would check here before putting any new site into the maps - even if this new name shows in the maps without a map entry, it is rejected. [as these ghost sites have some rights :-) ] If you ngrep the maps (or your final path database) "for "mickey": mickey harvard!ll-xn!cit-vax!mickey!%s Hmmm, interesting - mickey shows as connecting of cit-vax I look a little more and: ------------ #N mickey #S HP 9000 Model 540; HP-UX 5.11 (V.2) #O Walt Disney Company #C Mark Kimball, Tad Gielow #E mickey!usenet #T +1 818 956 2500 #P 1420 Flower St., Glendale, CA 91201 #L 34 12 00 N, 118 21 24 W #R Prior version had mistakes, this should be OK. #W mickey!lem (Lem Davis); Wed Nov 12 12:00:00 PDT 1986 #U cit-vax # mickey cit-vax(EVENING) ------------ this new site name "mickey" that I include here - WILL NOT appear in the maps posted to comp.mail.maps - -- #N mickey #S SUN Microsystem SUN-3/260, OS 3.4 #O Davox Corporation #C Pen Hsieh #E mickey!pen,mickey!usenet #T +1 617 667 4455 x308 #P 4 Federal Street Billerica, Massachusetts, 01821, USA #L 42 20 N / 71 05 W city #W mickey!pen (Pen Hsieh); Sun Dec 13 17:38:29 EST 1987 #U uunet # mickey uunet(DAILY) -- and even better - all smartsites will route replies to this (in MA) sites email to disney (in CA)! This would make me consider re-naming my machine :-) I ask everyone who is choosing a new site name to check the maps prior to coming to a final decisoon. Even in the fastidious case where you feel you have checked everything - the new site name may still be flagged for a few other reasons: 1) starts with a nureric character 2) contains an underscore (_) character ie. eagle_snax in this case, the name eagle-snax is reserved for this site. 3) contains an uppercase cahracter 4) resides on some other reserved name list someplace... => Duplicate site names are common occurances in news.newsites, => but they always get filtered out before they make it into the maps. I concur that news.newsites is not checked for duplicates - The people doing the mapping work have specific methods set up to accept new entries and updates - this is an evolving process, so postings that we see in news.newsites are more a prelude to the fact that another site really wants a map entry placed into the maps - sometimes an attempt at contacting the new site in question is made if a map entry is not received via the standard channels after some period of time... (for potential new england sites, cannot say for others...) Now and then, other site admins will send email me and inform of a possible problem with routing data or potential duplicate names. So, in conclusion, posting to news.newsites never end up in the maps. The same information may arrive to be processed, but rest assured, it will be processed. => A workable method even if the turn-around time is a => little long (and yes I know the mapping project is working on => improving that). I can turn new entries and updates around in 24 hours - Do we really want this? I have seen some discussion on this topic and it is my feeling that "substantial modifications" or when there is a set amount of work (in the queue to prevent backlog) should determine how often updates are posted - Remember the people doing the map processing donate their time to the task... Oh, we cannot forget that domain entries have lots of rights as they pay for their entries... => However in this case the new "mickey" is connected to => uunet. Shouldn't someone at uunet be checking the maps before they => connect a new site? UUNET could do (and perhaps does) an initial scan to determine if there is a duplicate invloved - but when the entry is to be processed for placement into the maps, it would be flagged right off (in this case) - btw, before any new UUCP connections are taken on by !necntc, this first pass through on their hostname is done - then a strong request that an 'official map entry' be submitted helpin to construct one if need be... This could/should be a good general practicee when taking on new sites. => Any other site could be excused but much of the => net counts on uunet as an authoritative source for routing. This statement bothers me a little - uunet never officially offered auto-routing (to my knowledge) - and when I have attempted such, received email failure messages in return. Before mickey (in MA) gets into the maps, the hostname will have been changed - this implies that uunet will have to make the mod in its UUCP config... Another comment on UUNET: this is a service - why should uunet autoroute email? It is a problem with sites that use USENET news paths for email paths - but I digress... the sites pay for all data picked up and sent to UUNET. These sites do not want email routed through their pay for play links! -jj -- Yours for accurate map data, Jeff Janock - UUCP Project New England Map Coordinator {decvax,harvard,mit-eddie,linus,adelie, etc}!necntc!nemap