Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!amdcad!ames!mailrus!iuvax!bsu-cs!dhesi
From: dhesi@bsu-cs.UUCP (Rahul Dhesi)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Why not use a .UUCP domain?
Summary: was Re: Why use a domain?
Message-ID: <4220@bsu-cs.UUCP>
Date: 6 Oct 88 16:18:45 GMT
References: <137@microsoft.UUCP> <5673@zodiac.UUCP> <Oct.5.23.13.39.1988.12866@NET.BIO.NET>
Reply-To: dhesi@bsu-cs.UUCP (Rahul Dhesi)
Organization: CS Dept, Ball St U, Muncie, Indiana
Lines: 31

In article <Oct.5.23.13.39.1988.12866@NET.BIO.NET> lear@NET.BIO.NET (Eliot
Lear) writes:
>There are essentially three benefits of using real domains over .UUCP:
...
>2]  It increases the name space.  There can only be one foo.UUCP, but
>    there can be a foo.rutgers.edu and a foo.berkeley.edu, etc.

This is probably true for now.

(Wishful thinking follows.)

It doesn't have to be.  I can imagine a modified domain system, which
increases the namespace without eliminating the UUCP domain, in which:

     foo.berkeley.UUCP is a valid domain address (and "valid" is not
     synonymous with "registered"),

     mail to foo.berkeley.UUCP goes to a server for the UUCP domain
     that then relays it to berkeley.UUCP,
     
     that relays it to site foo.berkeley.UUCP,
     
     whose whereabouts might be known only to berkeley.UUCP.
     
Only a few sites need be at the topmost level within the UUCP domain.
Initially all UUCP sites will be something.UUCP but this number would
decrease as more of them hid themselves from the top level and relied
on relay sites.  The current UUCP topology is fairly tree-like
already.
-- 
Rahul Dhesi         UUCP:  <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!dhesi