🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <k1auwB4w165w@willard.atl.ga.us> dawson@willard.atl.ga.us writes:

   nelson@crynwr.com (Russell Nelson) writes:

   > In article <H9TkwB1w165w@willard.UUCP> dawson@willard.UUCP writes:
   > 
   >    How will that help?  You'll still NOT deliver mail to valid sites.  If
   >    you're going to suggest that .UUCP be made a valid Internet domain, then
   >    there should be some mechanism worked out to allow DNS to route mail to
   >    a site in the .UUCP domain.  No, DNS doesn't do that now.
   > 
   > There is no such thing as a site in the .UUCP domain, and such sites
   > are not valid sites.  willard.UUCP only tells me that someone,
   > somewhere, transports mail to a UUCP host called willard.  I don't
   > CARE how you get your email.  You could get it via carrier pigeon
   > for all I care.  Would you advocate registering the .PIGEON domain if
   > you did?  Why not register a .SLIP domain or a .PPP domain?

   The voice of the Internet Gestapo.  Thanks, I'm really glad to hear that
   I don't exist, that I'm a non-site.

Thus says <dawson@willard.atl.ga.us>.

   > There is no point in trying to convince you that you're wrong; the
   > fact that people can't send you mail should convince you.  I see that
   > you're getting a FQDN, so why do you continue to argue for .UUCP??

   Did I argue for .UUCP?  Or, have you totally missed the larger context
   I've been striving for?

No, you're arguing that everyone should run pathalias.  Yeah, well,
remember HOSTS.TXT?  It got old.  Pathalias has gotten old.

   >    The Internet has, in the past, taken the easy way out on this one, only
   >    attempting to define mail delivery to sites that are provably on the
   >    Internet.  That, IMO, is rather short-sighted.  "Good enough," perhaps.
   >    Not, I say.
   > 
   > I suppose that, before the advent of MX records and MX-smart mailers,
   > your statement would have been correct.  It is now losing wrong.  Is
   > crynwr.com "provably on the Internet"?  No, I have no IP access at all.
   > 
   > Now, you're probably going to reply that even though I'm not on the
   > Internet, my MX and SOA records are.

   Exactly.

   > So what??  I pay PSI $25/month to maintain those records.  If
   > they piss me off, I go to someone else. I don't care that I
   > can't ``vi named.crynwr''; they don't need to be changed because
   > they work.

   Good for you.

Well, weren't you unhappy because you couldn't change your own DNS
entries?  I can't change mine either, but I don't really care,
because the people who maintain my DNS records are my wage slaves.

-russ <nelson@crynwr.com> What canst *thou* say?
Crynwr Software           Crynwr Software sells packet driver support.
11 Grant St.              315-268-1925 Voice  |  LPF member - ask me about
Potsdam, NY 13676         315-268-9201 FAX    |  the harm software patents do.