🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 17 Mar 1992 15:57:56 EST <GATEH@CONNCOLL> said:
> ...  Let me see if I have the theory right:
>
>1. For a host connected to both BITNET and the Internet, mailer
>software should be appropriately configured so that outgoing mail is
>delivered via the appropriate network.  I have configured sendmail
>so that BITNET addresses go to UREP, and all others go to TCP, which
>I assume is correct.

OK, if you treat DOMAIN NAMES entries with ":interconnect.NO" as "BITNET
addresses".  There is usually a reason (perhaps obsolete) for that value,
such as not being a valid Internet domain (like .UUCP) or being MXed
back into BITNET through CUNY.

>2. For the same host, routing tables should be configured so that
>incoming mail is delivered via the appropriate connection, and does
>not unnecessarily use gateways between the nets.

Sounds right.

>3. For hosts connected to only one of the two networks, outgoing
>mail to a host on both networks using the "foreign" network address
>should be rerouted to the same network (ie if a BITNET-only user
>sends mail to my Internet address, their mailer should reroute the
>mail to my BITNET address so as to avoid unnecessary use of a
>gateway).  My assumption is that this is the purpose of DOMAIN.NAMES
>for the BITNET side,

This part is less clearcut, but you can provide some guidance to others.
If you change your DOMAIN NAMES registration to :interconnect.YES or MX
but leave it :mailer.MAILER@CONNCOLL, you will achieve that for hosts
with mailers strictly honoring DOMAIN NAMES.  Individual hosts may have
special circumstances and ignore your guidance.

>                     but do I also need to create an MX record
>redirecting Internet mail directed at my BITNET address to my
>Internet address for the Internet side?  Or is it the case that the
>responsibility to map BITNET node CONNCOLL to mvax.cc.conncoll.edu
>falls on the Internet user, using whois, etc...

You can't create an MX record for unadorned CONNCOLL or for CONNCOLL
under the non-domain BITNET.  The only productive thing an Internet
node can do with blah.BITNET is route it through some handy gateway.
Many choose to reject it.  The unadorned CONNCOLL is likely to be
rejected or treated as being in the local subdomain (neither of which
will get it to you).

>These questions are provoked by people asking me, "What address
>should I give out?"  Theoretically I would like to say, It doesn't
>matter, the nets *should* take care of it, but I'm not so sure.

We recommend that people give out Internet addresses only unless they
know that the recipient _cannot_ send to a domain name.  My own card
has both addresses, carefully labeled, but if I ever use up the current
box I'll probably take off the BITNET address on the next printing.

Mark R. Williamson, Rice U., Houston TX; MARK@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU or @RICEVM1