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