Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!daemon From: daemon@decwrl.UUCP Newsgroups: net.mail Subject: Domains Message-ID: <5451@decwrl.UUCP> Date: Mon, 6-Feb-84 10:33:34 EST Article-I.D.: decwrl.5451 Posted: Mon Feb 6 10:33:34 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 9-Feb-84 04:48:08 EST Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP Organization: DEC Western Research Lab, Los Altos, CA Lines: 19 From: atfab::wyman From: ATFAB::WYMAN I think it would be a very unfortunate mistake if domains on the USENET were implemented along the lines of any of the "Area" specification methods suggested (such as Telco Area Code). To a great extent, one of the real benifits of the Domain concept is that it provides for the "logical" structuring of the network, as opposed to the purely physical structure which currently is forced by the requirement for explicit path name specification. The individual sender of a mail message should not be concerned with the network topology, nor should that user be required to analyze Telco tariffs to determine the most economical routing to a particular node... If someone is trying to get a message to me at DEC they will hopefully be able to rely on the domain structure to ensure that it gets here quickly and cheaply. bob wyman