Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!vsi1!lmb
From: lmb@vsi1.UUCP (Larry Blair)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Dynamic vs. passive routing: site rights
Message-ID: <965@vsi1.UUCP>
Date: 25 Aug 88 22:33:56 GMT
References: <4902@netnews.upenn.edu>
Reply-To: lmb@vsi1.UUCP (Larry Blair)
Organization: VICOM Systems Inc., San Jose, CA
Lines: 14

In article <4902@netnews.upenn.edu> brant@linc.cis.upenn.edu (Brant Cheikes) writes:
=One person's rule tells us that machines should respect explicit bang
=paths, only rerouting when the next hop is not a neighbor.  The effect
=of this rule for a given host may be higher phone bills.  Suppose
=machine A has a cheap link to B and an expensive link to C.  If mail
=comes to A, with next-hop listed as C, and A can determine that link B
=could be used instead (dynamic routing), then doesn't A have the right
=to change the route?  Or must A use the more expensive route it was
=given, just because someone else decided it was "better" BY THEIR
=DEFINITION.

You've completely missed the point.  If I give your site a path b!c!user,
I don't care how you get it to b.  If you have a cheaper path to b than
a direct call, send it that way.  What I care about is when you send it
to a site that you think is c.  Only b knows who their c is.