Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!apple!vsi1!lmb From: lmb@vicom.COM (Larry Blair) Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp Subject: Re: I wish people would stop flaming rerouters Message-ID: <1661@vicom.COM> Date: 28 Apr 89 17:23:14 GMT References: <3392@ddsw1.MCS.COM> Reply-To: lmb@vicom.COM (Larry Blair) Organization: VICOM Systems Inc., San Jose, CA Lines: 23 In article dpz@pilot.njin.net (David Paul Zimmerman) writes: =In article <3392@ddsw1.MCS.COM> karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) writes: = => Yet another good argument for why rutgers shouldn't reroute mail, or at => least learn how to handle the stuff! Given that this is a loop solely AT => rutgers, I'm not impressed. = =Bull. The path is ...!rutgers!andromeda!antares!zeus. If you look at the =Received: headers, the problem is at andromeda, not rutgers. In fact, rutgers =continues to do the right thing throughout the loop - sending it to andromeda =- because that's how you get to antares! "Solely AT rutgers"? If you mean ="solely within Rutgers University", you don't know much about the internals =politics here. Quick lesson: BULL! It doesn't matter whether rutgers or andromeda is at fault here, because the real fault lies with rerouting mailers. I'm not going to re-argue this tired line, but there is no good reason to do active rerouting. As far as Rutgers politics, it doesn't matter to the rest of the world. We see a single machine, run by Mel Pleasant, that will take your carefully constructed path and send the mail to Finland. -- Larry Blair ames!vsi1!lmb lmb@vicom.com