Xref: utzoo news.admin:2704 comp.mail.uucp:1375
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!killer!vector!rpp386!pigs!haugj
From: haugj@pigs.UUCP (The Beach Bum)
Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: The rebirth of USENET
Summary: Nope, you got it wrong Paul.
Message-ID: <168@pigs.UUCP>
Date: 17 Jun 88 19:20:20 GMT
References: <585@cbnews.ATT.COM> <1100@bellboy.UUCP> <3095@palo-alto.DEC.COM>
Organization: Big "D" Home for Wayward Hackers
Lines: 23

In article <3095@palo-alto.DEC.COM>, vixie@palo-alto.DEC.COM (Paul Vixie) writes:
> I don't think AT&T will only speak to their neighbors to send and receive
> AT&T traffic.  They could do this, but it doesn't seem likely to me.
> It's more likely that 'att' will still handle thousands of messages
> per day of non-AT&T traffic, picking them up from direct UUCP neighbors
> and sending them to others.

This is wrong given the information that I have.  My understanding is that
if the `From' machine and the `To' machine are both not part of either
att.com or, if the `To' machine is not on the ARPAnet, that the letter
will be dropped.  It is also my understanding that AT&T has already put
this into effect on several systems.

For those who may wish to defend AT&T, they are the ONLY company which I
am aware of which will not transport third part mail, even if the third
party is a local call to an AT&T gateway.  Which means, Illinios and
New Jersey are both going to suffer.

- John.
-- 
 The Beach Bum                                 Big "D" Home for Wayward Hackers
 UUCP: ...!killer!rpp386!jfh                          jfh@rpp386.uucp :SMAILERS

 "You are in a twisty little maze of UUCP connections, all alike" -- fortune