uucp sitenames (6 letter uniqueness?!?)

[Donn Seeley]

	From:  Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren at RAND-UNIX.ARPA>

	As it turns out, the problem of long (> 6 or > 7) sitenames in
	the UUCP's that allow such names (when talking to other
	software that doesn't) can be fixed by clever additions of
	multiple sitename entries in the appropriate tables.  However,
	it should be noted that the UUCP project plans to insist on 6
	char uniqueness in sitenames for the immediate to middle
	future.

This already would send my old workplace down the tubes.  All the
machines there are named sdchem[a-z] and depend on 7-character
uniqueness to distinguish them.  They've had these names for years.  Do
they suddenly fail to conform to the 'standard' because some NEW UUCP
can't distinguish the sitenames?  Even if existing sitenames which
require 7-character uniqueness are permitted, why should new sites need
a more stringent standard?  It strikes me as unfair, especially when
(as Lauren notes) work-arounds can be found for troublesome sites.

I doubt Lauren means to be unfair here, but I really think the
directory should be more liberal.  I suggest that we either allow
arbitrary-length sitenames and let the individual sites with routing
problems decide how to handle them, or at worst settle for the
(existing) 7-character standard.  The site directory could if necessary
flag entries that cause problems for known versions of UUCP (e.g., a
site has 7 letters in its name, a site is not unique in 7 letters, a
site has upper case in its name, this site can only handle 6 character
unique sitenames, and so on) and the requisite routing software on each
machine could then make decisions about how best to get mail where it
needs to go.  Does that sound reasonable?

Donn Seeley    University of Utah CS Dept    donn at utah-cs.arpa
40 46' 6"N 111 50' 34"W    (801) 581-5668    decvax!utah-cs!donn