Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!yale!bunker!stpstn!aad
From: a...@stpstn.UUCP (Anthony A. Datri)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin
Subject: Can someone explain the relationship between domains and uucp?
Message-ID: <1830@stpstn.UUCP>
Date: 30 Jun 88 03:05:36 GMT
Reply-To: a...@stpstn.UUCP (Anthony A. Datri)
Organization: The Stepstone Corporation, Sandy Hook, CT
Lines: 15
I have a general understanding of domains in the internet world, but can
someone explain them in the uucp world, both "real" ones like (say) .stpstn,
and the "fake" one .UUCP?
I'm sorry if this seems like a stupid question, but I've spent most of my time
up until now in an arpa/bitnet environment, and I want to keep my site
up-to-date on what's happening. I hope to install elm and smail as soon as
Doug Dejulio gets off his butt and sends my tape back.
--
@disclaimer(Any concepts or opinions above are entirely mine, not those of my
employer, my GIGI, or my 11/34)
beak is beak is not
Anthony A. Datri,SysAdmin,StepstoneCorporation,stpstn!aad
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!epiwrl!epimass!jbuck
From: jb...@epimass.EPI.COM (Joe Buck)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin
Subject: Re: Can someone explain the relationship between domains and uucp?
Message-ID: <2254@epimass.EPI.COM>
Date: 30 Jun 88 16:41:44 GMT
References: <1830@stpstn.UUCP>
Reply-To: jb...@epimass.EPI.COM (Joe Buck)
Organization: Entropic Processing, Inc., Cupertino, CA
Lines: 26
In article <1...@stpstn.UUCP> a...@stpstn.UUCP (Anthony A. Datri) writes:
>
>I have a general understanding of domains in the internet world, but can
>someone explain them in the uucp world, both "real" ones like (say) .stpstn,
>and the "fake" one .UUCP?
Neither .stpstn nor .UUCP is a "real" domain. Neither is ".ARPA".
Thanks to the efforts of the UUCP Project and NIC, UUCP-only sites
can obtain a registered domain, as can BITNET and CSNET sites.
Our domain, .EPI.COM, is one such. To have a registered domain you
must have an Internet forwarder, a site on the Internet that knows
how to mail at least to your gateway machine and has agreed to
handling the traffic. Domain mailers, when given an address, first
try to locate the host. If they don't know how to get the mail
there, they attempt to locate the domain. Domain servers have
"MX records" to tell how to reach a given domain.
Provided that the host is on the UUCP map, Internet folks can mail
to site.UUCP by mailing to site.UUCP%uunet.uu.net . This will fail
if the site is not on the map.
--
- Joe Buck {uunet,ucbvax,pyramid,<smart-site>}!epimass.epi.com!jbuck
jb...@epimass.epi.com Old Arpa mailers: jbuck%epimass.epi....@uunet.uu.net
If you leave your fate in the hands of the gods, don't be
surprised if they have a few grins at your expense. - Tom Robbins
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!ubvax!vsi1!wyse!mips!prls!philabs!sbcs!bnlux0!abrams
From: abr...@bnlux0.bnl.gov (Karl L. Abrams)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin
Subject: Re: Can someone explain the relationship between domains and uucp?
Message-ID: <568@bnlux0.bnl.gov>
Date: 6 Jul 88 13:49:33 GMT
References: <1830@stpstn.UUCP> <2254@epimass.EPI.COM>
Reply-To: abr...@bnlux0.UUCP (Karl L. Abrams)
Organization: Brookhaven National Lab., Upton, N.Y.
Lines: 14
In article <2...@epimass.EPI.COM> jb...@epimass.EPI.COM (Joe Buck) writes:
> :
> :
>Provided that the host is on the UUCP map, Internet folks can mail
>to site.UUCP by mailing to site.UUCP%uunet.uu.net . This will fail
>if the site is not on the map.
>--
My site is on INTERNET and has a UUCP connection also. Given that
we can reach UUCP sites via INTERNET, is it useful for a site like mine to
bother with maintaining UUCP maps and pathalias?
--
INTERNET: abr...@bnlux0.bnl.gov
BITNET: abr...@bnlux0.BITNET
UUCP: ...philabs!sbcs!bnlux0!abrams
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!uwmcsd1!ig!agate!ucbvax!decwrl!palo-alto!vixie
From: vi...@palo-alto.DEC.COM (Paul Vixie)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin
Subject: Re: Can someone explain the relationship between domains and uucp?
Message-ID: <3354@palo-alto.DEC.COM>
Date: 8 Jul 88 20:40:36 GMT
References: <1830@stpstn.UUCP> <2254@epimass.EPI.COM> <568@bnlux0.bnl.gov>
Reply-To: vi...@volition.UUCP (Paul Vixie)
Organization: DEC Western Research Lab
Lines: 49
In article <5...@bnlux0.bnl.gov> abr...@bnlux0.UUCP (Karl L. Abrams) writes:
# In article <2...@epimass.EPI.COM> jb...@epimass.EPI.COM (Joe Buck) writes:
# > :
# > :
# >Provided that the host is on the UUCP map, Internet folks can mail
# >to site.UUCP by mailing to site.UUCP%uunet.uu.net . This will fail
# >if the site is not on the map.
Note that site.uu.net is equivilent to site.uucp%uunet.uu.net, since uunet's
mailer will treat them more-or-less identically. It's not just for customers
of uunet, though you'd need to be a customer of uunet to actually _register_
a host.uu.net name in the uucp map.
# My site is on INTERNET and has a UUCP connection also. Given that
# we can reach UUCP sites via INTERNET, is it useful for a site like mine to
# bother with maintaining UUCP maps and pathalias?
Yes, it's useful. If you depend on Internet alone, you are only going to be
able to reach people who've registered their UUCP hosts with the NIC (either
in .US or through the UUCP project or by approaching the NIC directly). And
when you send those people mail, it'll go via Internet SMTP to the UUCP site's
MX, then from there over UUCP to get to the site itself.
This can be slow, depending on how well the Internet is working that hour,
and on how fast (and how direct) the link is between the MX and the UUCP host.
If you have a direct (or indirect but low-latency) link toward the UUCP host
that was pure UUCP, it _could_ be faster in some situations. Telebit modems
make this more and more common.
Also, if the UUCP host you are trying to reach is not registered with the
NIC, they won't have an MX record in any case. To reach these (if you want
to), you need to either: know a full route from you to them and give it in
the user agent (or alias it in the user agent); pass everything you don't
understand to a smarter host (like uunet); or run pathalias yourself.
I prefer to run pathalias myself, since I can then decide immediately whether
a message is deliverable or not. If you boot every unknown up to a smarter
host, it takes longer for the originating user to find out that he misspelled
(sp?) a host name. It also causes needless net activity.
Note that only the main mail hub of your domain needs to run pathalias; it
would become the "smart host" for the rest of your domain. This does not
cause the above problems because the mail hub is usually reachable on a
local ethernet.
--
Paul Vixie
Digital Equipment Corporation Work: vi...@dec.com Play: p...@vixie.UUCP
Western Research Laboratory uunet!decwrl!vixie uunet!vixie!paul
Palo Alto, California, USA +1 415 853 6600 +1 415 864 7013
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!jetson!john
From: j...@jetson.UUCP (John Owens)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin
Subject: Re: Can someone explain the relationship between domains and uucp?
Message-ID: <71@jetson.UUCP>
Date: 13 Jul 88 14:01:22 GMT
References: <1830@stpstn.UUCP> <2254@epimass.EPI.COM> <568@bnlux0.bnl.gov> <3354@palo-alto.DEC.COM>
Organization: SMART HOUSE Limited Partnership
Lines: 37
In article <3...@palo-alto.DEC.COM>, vi...@palo-alto.DEC.COM (Paul Vixie) writes:
> Note that site.uu.net is equivilent to site.uucp%uunet.uu.net, since uunet's
> mailer will treat them more-or-less identically. It's not just for customers
> of uunet, though you'd need to be a customer of uunet to actually _register_
> a host.uu.net name in the uucp map.
NOTE: I believe that Rick has said that if people start using uunet as
a general Internet->UUCP gateway (like they used seismo) he will
disable auto-routing, meaning that only uunet customers will be able
to use either of the two syntaxes.
There are no sites (that I know of) that have volunteered to be
general Internet->UUCP gateways. Specific Internet sites have agreed
to forward for specific UUCP sites; specifically, those that are
forwarders for UUCP Zone domains.
So the answer to
> # My site is on INTERNET and has a UUCP connection also. Given that
> # we can reach UUCP sites via INTERNET, is it useful for a site like mine to
> # bother with maintaining UUCP maps and pathalias?
is: Yes, definitely! Besides letting you reach UUCP sites more
directly, you can also use the data to route via UUCP to zones that
have MX, but for which UUCP is better/faster.
Now, a question for Paul or anyone who knows:
> able to reach people who've registered their UUCP hosts with the NIC (either
> in .US or through the UUCP project or by approaching the NIC directly). And
When did .US become active, what is it being used for, and how does
one sign up?! I haven't heard anything since 6 months ago, when it was
totally empty.
Thanks!
--
John Owens SMART HOUSE Limited Partnership
j...@jetson.UUCP (old uucp) uunet!jetson!john
+1 301 249 6000 (internet) john%jetson.u...@uunet.uu.net
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!bellcore!tness7!tness1!sugar!ficc!peter
From: pe...@ficc.UUCP (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin
Subject: Re: Can someone explain the relationship between domains and uucp?
Message-ID: <1111@ficc.UUCP>
Date: 18 Jul 88 13:29:36 GMT
References: <1830@stpstn.UUCP> <2254@epimass.EPI.COM> <568@bnlux0.bnl.gov> <71@jetson.UUCP>
Organization: SCADA
Lines: 8
In article <7...@jetson.UUCP>, j...@jetson.UUCP (John Owens) writes:
> NOTE: I believe that Rick has said that if people start using uunet as
> a general Internet->UUCP gateway he will disable auto-routing...
This is odd, since any traffic is more income for them. What's the
logic behind this?
--
Peter da Silva `-_-' Ferranti International Controls Corporation.
"Have you hugged U your wolf today?" (uunet,tness1)!sugar!ficc!peter.
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!rick
From: r...@seismo.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin
Subject: Re: Can someone explain the relationship between domains and uucp?
Summary: fair share
Message-ID: <44379@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV>
Date: 19 Jul 88 21:57:28 GMT
References: <1830@stpstn.UUCP> <2254@epimass.EPI.COM> <568@bnlux0.bnl.gov> <1111@ficc.UUCP>
Organization: Center for Seismic Studies, Arlington, VA
Lines: 11
The logic is rather straightforward. There is a limit to how much third
party traffic uunet's paying customers are willing to pass through.
Most of them will tolerate a small amount, but none of them are
willing to pay for everyone elses mail traffic.
In addition, arpanet and non-northamerican sites dont pay at all, so
there's not "income" from them. Most canadian sites only pay
a flat monthly membership fee and no usage fee. Theres no income from them
either - Just extra load.
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncc!lyndon
From: lyn...@ncc.Nexus.CA (Lyndon Nerenberg)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin
Subject: Re: Can someone explain the relationship between domains and uucp?
Message-ID: <10348@ncc.Nexus.CA>
Date: 20 Jul 88 21:06:32 GMT
References: <1830@stpstn.UUCP> <2254@epimass.EPI.COM> <568@bnlux0.bnl.gov> <71@jetson.UUCP> <1111@ficc.UUCP>
Reply-To: lyn...@ncc.nexus.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg)
Organization: Nexus Computing Inc.
Lines: 28
In article <1...@ficc.UUCP> pe...@ficc.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes:
>In article <7...@jetson.UUCP>, j...@jetson.UUCP (John Owens) writes:
>> NOTE: I believe that Rick has said that if people start using uunet as
>> a general Internet->UUCP gateway he will disable auto-routing...
>
>This is odd, since any traffic is more income for them. What's the
>logic behind this?
Actually, it's resulting in *less* income for them.
When we first signed up for uunet, we brought in nearly all the
comp groups, and gatewayed about 75% of our mail through them as
well. Now that uunet has become the great dumping ground that seismo
used to be, at least 50% of my calls to them fail, due to the
excessive load on that machine. As a result, we no longer take any
newsgroups (well, a couple) from uunet, and the only mail going through
them is for Europe or very closely connected sites.
This is also a real pain in the ass when you look at our phone bill
It costs me $4.00 every time their modem answers (3 minute minimum
charge per call). That's four dollars for every LOGIN FAILED, etc.,
of which we are getting to damn many.
I would be quite happy if the router was shut off for non-customers
(can you say mmdf?).
--
VE6BBM {alberta,pyramid,uunet}!ncc!lyndon lyn...@Nexus.CA
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ubvax!vsi1!lmb
From: l...@vsi1.UUCP (Larry Blair)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin
Subject: Re: Can someone explain the relationship between domains and uucp?
Message-ID: <838@vsi1.UUCP>
Date: 21 Jul 88 01:16:52 GMT
References: <1830@stpstn.UUCP> <2254@epimass.EPI.COM> <568@bnlux0.bnl.gov> <71@jetson.UUCP> <1111@ficc.UUCP> <10348@ncc.Nexus.CA>
Reply-To: l...@vsi1.UUCP (Larry Blair)
Organization: VICOM Systems Inc., San Jose, CA
Lines: 10
In article <10...@ncc.Nexus.CA> lyn...@ncc.nexus.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes:
[[ talking about problems connecting to uunet]]
|This is also a real pain in the ass when you look at our phone bill
|It costs me $4.00 every time their modem answers (3 minute minimum
|charge per call). That's four dollars for every LOGIN FAILED, etc.,
|of which we are getting to damn many.
How does uunet determine its billing? I can't believe that there could be a
connect charge without a login. How would they know who placed the call?
I could believe they might charge for FAILED(startup), although they shouldn't.
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!rick
From: r...@seismo.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin
Subject: Re: Can someone explain the relationship between domains and uucp?
Summary: OK(Startup)
Message-ID: <44380@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV>
Date: 21 Jul 88 14:53:52 GMT
References: <1830@stpstn.UUCP> <2254@epimass.EPI.COM> <568@bnlux0.bnl.gov> <838@vsi1.UUCP>
Organization: Center for Seismic Studies, Arlington, VA
Lines: 2
uunet charging begins when the two uucico processes have synced up
(I.e. when the OK (startup) message appears in the log file)
Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!oliveb!bunker!stpstn!aad
From: a...@stpstn.UUCP (Anthony A. Datri)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin
Subject: Re: uunet, billing, overload ?
Message-ID: <1917@stpstn.UUCP>
Date: 26 Jul 88 15:17:24 GMT
References: <1830@stpstn.UUCP* <2254@epimass.EPI.COM> <568@bnlux0.bnl.gov> <71@jetson.UUCP> <1111@ficc.UUCP> <10348@ncc.Nexus.CA> <838@vsi1.UUCP> <31240@philabs.Philips.Com> <379@uport.UUCP> <10352@ncc.Nexus.CA>
Reply-To: a...@stpstn.UUCP (Anthony A. Datri)
Organization: The Stepstone Corporation, Sandy Hook, CT
Lines: 9
Am I missing something? Wouldn't calling uunet via Tymnet, as recommended,
be cheaper than dialing them directly?
I'm about to subscribe us to uunet, so I'd like to know.
--
@disclaimer(Any concepts or opinions above are entirely mine, not those of my
employer, my GIGI, or my 11/34)
beak is beak is not
Anthony A. Datri,SysAdmin,StepstoneCorporation,stpstn!aad
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin
Path: utzoo!henry
From: he...@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: uunet, billing, overload ?
Message-ID: <1988Jul28.165953.6782@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
References: <31240@philabs.Philips.Com> <379@uport.UUCP> <10352@ncc.Nexus.CA> <1917@stpstn.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 88 16:59:53 GMT
In article <1...@stpstn.UUCP> a...@stpstn.UUCP (Anthony A. Datri) writes:
>Am I missing something? Wouldn't calling uunet via Tymnet, as recommended,
>be cheaper than dialing them directly?
Quite possibly not, if you're doing the direct call with a Trailblazer
modem. Tymnet is an expensive way to ship bulk data, because they charge
for volume as well as for connect time. The effective hourly rate for
bulk data movement over Tymnet is much higher than you'd think, once you
add in the per-byte or per-packet charges.
--
MSDOS is not dead, it just | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
smells that way. | uunet!mnetor!utzoo!henry he...@zoo.toronto.edu
|