Xref: utzoo comp.mail.uucp:1585 comp.mail.headers:378
Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!mailrus!emv
From: emv@mailrus.cc.umich.edu (Edward Vielmetti)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,comp.mail.headers
Subject: Re: what do _YOU_ mean by "all routing"??
Message-ID: <622@mailrus.cc.umich.edu>
Date: 9 Aug 88 03:57:45 GMT
References: <3732@palo-alto.DEC.COM>
Sender: usenet@mailrus.cc.umich.edu
Reply-To: emv@mailrus.cc.umich.edu (Edward Vielmetti)
Organization: University of Michigan Computing Center, Ann Arbor
Lines: 24

In article <3732@palo-alto.DEC.COM> vixie@palo-alto.DEC.COM (Paul Vixie) writes:
>
>This is only a demonstration of _passive routing_, which is a Good Thing
>according to me and is quite different from what Rutgers actually does.

I dunno, Paul.  When rutgers sends me mail, I know that it's going
to get to the intended site, and they're not going to give me
crap that's a reply to a news path article.  You know, the 25-hop
monsters that start in Denver Colorado and wend their way through
10 backbone sites (including yours) on their eventual way to some
poor fool in Ohio.  

When rutgers routes mail through mailrus, I'm almost positive
it will get to its intended recipient.

Hey, someone's got to keep the maps sane, right?  There's
much more confusion and anguish to be had by having your
mail end up on someone's small private workstation in Italy
that happens to have the same name as your node, let me
tell you.

(peter, do you want to let loose pathparse on the unsuspecting?
mailrus might not be a bad candidate.)

--Ed