[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       namedroppers
Subject:    Re:  A proposal - MX for "bitnet."
From:       allosaur.cis.ohio-state.edu!bob () tut ! cis ! ohio-state ! edu  (Bob Sutterfield)
Date:       1988-08-11 18:51:16
[Download RAW message or body]

I've collected a few very persuasive private responses that weren't
Cc:d to namedroppers/comp.protocols.tcp-ip.domains.  It seems my idea
isn't all that original, which doesn't surprise me.  Nor does it
surprise me that the positions held by the various sides are held
very, very strongly.

In summary, if someone were to offer authoritative MX for the
pseudo-domain .FOO, that would immediately turn it into the real
domain .FOO.  Since all non-blessed .FOOs are anachronistic holdovers
from the days of pre-domain transport-based routing, and since all
FOONIC administrators agreed long ago (1986) that they will migrate to
real domains Real Soon Now, that status as a real domain would only
slow the transition to more real real domains.

On the other hand, MXing for the remaining .FOOs (the set really only
includes .BITNET by now) is a matter of great short-term practical
expediency.  It would get the job done now in an easy way, within the
mechanism of the domain name system if not within its purest spirit.

It seems to me that the Right Thing to do is to encourage folks to fix
their mailers to sing in the key of `domain'.  We all suffer along
with local MX for local gateways, and special-case hacks in our
sendmail.cf's, until they do.  It's right in the long run.
-=-
 Bob Sutterfield, Department of Computer and Information Science
 The Ohio State University; 2036 Neil Ave. Columbus OH USA 43210-1277
 bob@cis.ohio-state.edu or ...!{att,pyramid,killer}!cis.ohio-state.edu!bob

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]