Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!uflorida!gatech!rayssd!gmp
From: gmp@rayssd.ray.com (Gregory M. Paris)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Mail survey #1
Message-ID: <3721@rayssd.ray.com>
Date: 5 Sep 88 21:15:52 GMT
References: <4740@b-tech.UUCP> <4747@b-tech.UUCP> <4748@b-tech.UUCP> <3703@rayssd.ray.com> <4750@b-tech.UUCP> <3710@rayssd.ray.com> <4753@b-tech.UUCP>
Sender: gmp@rayssd.ray.com (Gregory M. Paris @ Raytheon Company, Portsmouth RI)
Reply-To: gmp@rayssd.RAY.COM (Gregory M. Paris)
Organization: Raytheon Submarine Sandwich Division
Lines: 20

In article <4753@b-tech.UUCP> zeeff@b-tech.UUCP (Jon Zeeff) writes:
> I guess I can only tell you to talk to others who manually mark rutgers
> links as DEAD.  It does help.

It may help in the case of mail from sites using pathalias data different
from the published data.  It does not help with sites that have pathalias
data that's in sync with the rerouting site's data, nor does it help if
the mail has been routed manually.  I submit that most sites are using
the published data unaltered, and that those persons that route mail
manually do not check the published map data on a regular basis (if at all).
Even if you dispute these assumptions, you cannot claim that marking links
as DEAD will solve the problem for everyone, so I still see it as a
non-solution.  More, the idea seems born of a desire to punish active
rerouters, rather than improve mail service.

-- 
Greg Paris                    <gmp@rayssd.ray.com>
{decuac,gatech,necntc,sun,uiucdcs,ukma}!rayssd!gmp

                    NO KILL I