Article View: net.mail.headers
Article #143my note on MCI mail
From: "Benson I. Margulies"
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 1984 22:23
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 1984 22:23
55 lines
2921 bytes
2921 bytes
It occurs to me that I was at least half serious. Note: I. The argument from Political Economics We are told that large corporate organizations want to use PC sized machines to store and process data. We are told that these organizations want to interchange information amongst widely seperated examples of these machines. We know that a large corporation will have very little tolerance for insecurity, unreliability, and general flakeyness. THEREFORE, we conclude that large organizations will have little use for UUCP as we know it today. We know that corporations have money to spend to soolve their problems. They bought the PC's. They buy federal express packets for big bucks. We know that where there is a demand for a service, and money to pay (generously) for it, that the service will usually spring up, unless trampled by state intervention. THEREFORE, we expect some large organization to offer a means by which an organization with many scattered machines can reliably and securely deliver information amongst them. Is it any surprise that MCI mail already is claiming to offer this service, even if it isn't all there yet? II. An argument about "randoms" Now, what about the intrepid explorers? Today, the intrepid explorers use UUCP and phone-net and friends. What choice have they? Given a nice, reliable, organized alternative, will they use it? If its cheap enough they sure will. Phone calls ain't free either. Why should I leave my PC sitting around dialing the phone like a little "daemon" if I could hand the delivery problem off to someone else? III. But still, we have to design ... Of course, a system like MCI, let alone a bunch of competing systems like MCI, will need to deal with name resolution and all those wonders. The domain scheme is a pretty reasonable approach. Let's hope that the commercial entities buy in before the chaos gets out of hand. But I think that the scenerio of 47million PC all tryping to figure out what phone number to call to reach each other is silly. They will call up MCI, or SPC, or the PostalService, and let it worry, for a fee. So to get really contentious: UUCP will die under its own weight, and be replaced by commercial carriers who have the resources to apply Internet/CCITT style solutions to naming and routing problems.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<840218222344.582791@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!hou3c!Margulies@MIT-MULTICS.ARPAShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site hou3c.UUCP
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!hou3c!Margulies@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
From: Margulies@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA ("Benson I. Margulies")
Newsgroups: net.mail.headers
Subject: my note on MCI mail
Message-ID: <840218222344.582791@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 18-Feb-84 17:23:00 EST
Article-I.D.: hou3c.301
Posted: Sat Feb 18 17:23:00 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 19-Feb-84 08:14:35 EST
Sender: ka@hou3c.UUCP (Kenneth Almquist)
Lines: 55