On Wednesday, December 01, 2010 10:57:40 pm Mark Andrews wrote: > And there would have been total confusion if there had been multiple > uunet's and a few other well known nodes. UUCP had anchor points. > Just different ones to the DNS.
Yeah, and with virtually everyone's bangpaths starting with uunet or one of those other anchors (I seem to rememer bangpaths starting at kremvax, but perhaps I'm senile...), it's still a hierarchy. I had a site in the maps years ago, and even had 'registered' a pseudo '.uucp' domain.... remember those? That said, it did work pretty well. SMTP and direct MX was supposed to make all that go away, and now we're talking about it again. Do I need to go back to using smail 2.5 to do mail routing? :-) Web browsing using uucico was rather, uh, interesting (but doable, thanks to the virtually text-only web at the time, and that assumed the target node/server was online at that time). Not really scalable to broadband, as part of the blockability issue is IP and IP routing hijackability (to coin a contrived phrase). It was a different world, especially on the user side. If you had multiple dialin accounts under the uucp system you could very easily bypass many blocks simply using dialup; but dialup is just too slow for today's content.
