[101] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: EP.NET ???
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Havard.Eidnes@runit.sintef.no)
Sat Jul 29 09:43:08 1995
To: bmanning@isi.edu
Cc: roll@stupi.se, nanog@merit.edu
From: Havard.Eidnes@runit.sintef.no
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 28 Jul 1995 22:55:52 -0700 (PDT)"
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 15:33:29 +0200
> > Personally I think that this is actually a value-subtracted service,
> > as the EP.NET organisation does not run the named boxes, or the
> > exchange points.
> >
> > It would be much more helpfull the the interfaces that faces the NAP
> > and another provider where following each providers naming
> > conventions, and had a domain-name that would point the users to the
> > organisation that actually operates the boxes.
>
> Yes, that is the desired goal, however some sites are not
> willing or able to do so, so there is a default case where a
> name is available. (There are some exchange points where no
> forward is registered, which can be a hassel)
The existence of a forward mapping is not a necessary technical
precondition for you to insert a reverse mapping which points in
the right direction, i.e. at the organization operating the
boxes. However I also have trouble seeing why any ISP would
willingly decline to register it's boxes in the DNS. I fully
agree with PL that introducing EP.NET into this is value-
subtraction, in that it will just add unneeded confusion.
- H=E5vard
