HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mjo@iao.ford.com (Mike O'Connor)
Newsgroups: mi.misc,mi.news
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Date: 25 Jan 1993 11:59:20 GMT
Organization: Not an official spokesperson for Ford Motor Company
Distribution: mi
Reply-To: Mike O'Connor <mjo@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost

I've been corresponding with Jon Postel at ISI regarding this
discussion, trying to get some more information on their thoughts.
This is where most of my information is coming from:

In article <1993Jan24.193921.24436@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org
(Kevin Darcy) writes:

:>I'd certianly have no objections -- and maybe a sudden influx of mi.us
:>sites would make the ISI folks more willing to hand over local control.
:But there are no guarantees, right?

According to Mr. Postel, in email:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The US domain are now delegating portions of the US domain.  The US
domain structure is

        <local-name>.<locality>.<state-code>.US.

We will delegate a locality.  For example, we will delegate

        "Ann-Arbor.MI.US"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This was news to me.

:>A quick grep/sort/uniq thru the mi maps shows 36 mi.us sites and 48
:>mi.org sites.
:Sounds like people have already voted for mi.org with their hosts.
:
:I've got yet another host here I'd be willing to register in mi.org, if 
:it's a matter of tipping the scales even further... :-)

Heh...  you're not the only one.  

						...Mike


-- 
 Michael J. O'Connor           |  Internet:  mjo@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com
 Ford Motor Company, OPEO      |  UUCP:      ...!{backbone}!fmsrl7!mjo
 20000 Rotunda, Bldg. 1-3001   |  Phone:     +1 (313) 248-1260
 Dearborn, MI  48121           |  Fax:       +1 (313) 323-6277
From: rkushner@sycom.mi.org (Ronald Kushner)
Newsgroups: mi.misc
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Date: 25 Jan 93 22:32:37 GMT
Organization: Michigan Information eXchange
X-BBS-Software: EXCELSIOR! V0.976

In an article, chad@quality.ta.ford.com (Chad Childers) writes:

>>get rid of the domain!
>

>Er, I'm against this  proposal too, but if you decide to kill it, there's
>really not much we can do.  Of course, I run a .mi.org site, so I care...
>because it's worked really well for me, and I also send a lot of mail to
>.mi.org sites, and that works dependably.  Notably, my mail to sycom.mi.org
>hamjudo.mi.org, and dojo.mi.org works fine, while a bunch of mail I had
>going out to m-net.ann-arbor.mi.us and grex...mi.us bit the big one.

Really?? Your mail to here works great?  My sister at Western Michigan has to 
use sycom!rkushner@msen.com to mail me, they don't seem to understand 
rkushner@sycom.mi.org...


Ronald Kushner               rkushner@sycom.mi.org | sycom!rkushner@msen.com

Sycom Design Software                        VOICE:      (313) 268-5117
P.O. Box 353                          Michigan BBS:      (313) 939-6666
Sterling Heights, MI  48311-0353                         (313) 920-3829
Xref: sparky mi.misc:931 mi.news:215
From: chad@quality.ta.ford.com (Chad Childers)
Newsgroups: mi.misc,mi.news
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Date: 28 Jan 1993 21:18:25 GMT
Organization: Technical Affairs, Ford Motor Company
Reply-To: Chad Childers <chad@quality.ta.ford.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pms035.pms.ford.com
X-Disclaimer: Not an official spokesman for Ford Tech Affairs
Originator: chad@pms035

>Chad's probably just kidding here, but . . . .  In this case, EDU is the

Yeah, I was just being silly.  However there's a grain of truth to the fact
that EDU is a special case for the US only.  In the UK it's ac.uk or co.uk,
and other countries are supposed to just have the country code.  Why am I
telling you this when I'm sure you're aware of it?  I s'pose it's because
I don't want to give up my org until they pry my cold dead fingers from the
keyboard.

-- 
Chad Childers                            Work: chad@quality.ta.ford.com
FMEAplus Project Leader                  Home: chad@deep.mi.org
Xref: sparky mi.misc:897 mi.news:195
From: bryan@notorious.rs.itd.umich.edu (Bryan Beecher)
Newsgroups: mi.misc,mi.news
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Date: 22 Jan 1993 18:35:35 GMT
Organization: U of Michigan ITD Research Systems
Distribution: mi
NNTP-Posting-Host: notorious.rs.itd.umich.edu

Mike O'Connor writes:

> Aigh!!  I like mi.org, and its relative flexibility.  I can relocate
> my site within Michigan and not feel compelled to change my name
> 'cause I happen to enter a different city.  The addressing is
> certainly less awkward.

Is this really an issue, though?  How often do most people move?  Or, if it
is the case where a host moves back-and-forth between two cities, for instance,
one could just have two MI.US entries.  Or is this particular example one
where the computer in question is highly mobile?  If so, I'd argue that it
still belongs in MI.US, but perhaps in some sort of domain along the lines
of <host>.MOBILE.MI.US.

> Ahhh...  the three high schools that I see in your DNS seem to be
> under k12.mi.us, rather than some-city.mi.us.  How do the people who
> run .ca feel about a k13.{province}.ca for their high schools?

Right.  The naming scheme is supposed to be <school>.<district>.K12.MI.US.
Right now the ones in Michigan don't have the <district> part, but that
ought to change soon.

> I am not in favor of it.  Of course, I realize that you're doing all
> the work involved -- for our information, how much work IS involved?

Not a whole lot.  I have to add the name to the DNS, and Wes has to add the
name to a list on destroyer.rs.itd.umich.edu in the cases where we provide
the MX host.

I just don't want to see us behind-the-times using something like MI.ORG
when the rest of the country is (slowly) moving towards its respective parts
of the US domain.
-- 
Bryan Beecher, U-M Information Technology Division (+1 313 747 4050)
Domain:	Bryan.Beecher@umich.edu      Path:  ..!uunet!destroyer!bryan
Xref: sparky mi.misc:907 mi.news:204
From: emv@msen.com (Edward Vielmetti)
Newsgroups: mi.misc,mi.news
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Followup-To: mi.misc,mi.news
Date: 25 Jan 1993 05:29:43 GMT
Organization: Msen, Inc. -- Ann Arbor, Michigan
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.msen.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Wesley Craig (wes@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu) wrote:
: In article <1jpgh2INNqo@ope001.iao.ford.com> Chad Childers <chad@quality.ta.ford.com> writes:
: >Notably, my mail to sycom.mi.org
: >hamjudo.mi.org, and dojo.mi.org works fine, while a bunch of mail I had
: >going out to m-net.ann-arbor.mi.us and grex...mi.us bit the big one.

: I think that's probably coincidence.  Or are you suggesting that the
: *name service* differences between mi.org and mi.us caused your mail to
: bounce?

sycom.mi.org mail goes through ilium.troy.msen.com
hamjudo.mi.org mail goes through heifetz.msen.com
dojo.mi.org  goes through wsu-cs.cs.wayne.edu , fmsrl7, and destroyer

m-net.ann-arbor.mi.us goes through destroyer and vela
grex.ann-arbor.mi.us goes through destroyer

Mail to Msen customers should not bounce.  If it does we work with
the parties in question and get it fixed.  

For my own part I would rather see the University of Michigan spend
its attention on other public works projects and get out of the
free UUCP feeds business, especially in the parts of the state
where there are commercial providers and other free providers ready
to go at the task.  Now that ITD has a big bill to pay back to the
US Gov't for overcharging for MTS, it hardly makes any sense to me
why they are giving away a service that's either a valuable service
(in which case they should charge for it) or a worthless service
(in which case they should stop doing it).  

  Edward Vielmetti, vice president for research, Msen Inc. emv@Msen.com
        Msen Inc., 628 Brooks, Ann Arbor MI  48103 +1 313 998 GLOB
From: emv@msen.com (Edward Vielmetti)
Newsgroups: mi.misc
Subject: Re: Zmodem on Merit
Date: 25 Jan 1993 06:18:52 GMT
Organization: Msen, Inc. -- Ann Arbor, Michigan
Distribution: mi
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.msen.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Brian S. Schang (brian@fog.ann-arbor.mi.us) wrote:
: Hi.  The other day I was trying to do a binary zmodem transfer from
: my CAEN account on Merit with no success.  I am guessing that I have
: to tell Merit that I am going to transfer a binary file through the
: various Merit commands.  What commands are necessary?  What do I have
: to do to get a zmodem transfer to work from Merit?

zmodem through the pdp-11s is generally a lose.  there are occasional
hacks that people do to get it to work, but merit has never understood
that people want to do high speed modem transfers, and so nothing
has really been supported.

your best luck at getting transfers into CAEN is to join the public
access ip nets that are starting up around town; for $20/mo you can
get a flat rate service through Msen which gives you a "disconnected"
(Msen network only) network number and an account on our shell access
system.  from those two you can shoot files back and forth no problem.
I have seen the "proxy ftpd" stuff for talking through firewalls and
soon as there's a spare moment we'll be running that so you can do
direct FTPs even tho you're not **really** connected to the net.  

it is time for people to stop putting up with the extreme goofyness
of the merit dial up system and apply their modems to more productive
uses.  by propping up their paleolithic systems you perpetuate the
ancient regime.  

just say no to pdp-11s.

  Edward Vielmetti, vice president for research, Msen Inc. emv@Msen.com
        Msen Inc., 628 Brooks, Ann Arbor MI  48103 +1 313 998 GLOB

Newsgroups: mi.misc,mi.news
From: meg@netmeg.ann-arbor.mi.us (Meg Geddes)
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Organization: netmeg.ann-arbor.mi.us
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 07:54:43 GMT

In article <1jvtslINN6i9@nigel.msen.com> emv@msen.com (Edward Vielmetti) writes:
>
>For my own part I would rather see the University of Michigan spend
>its attention on other public works projects and get out of the
>free UUCP feeds business, especially in the parts of the state
>where there are commercial providers and other free providers ready

I'm sure you do - you co-run a commercial provider and would stand to do
pretty well if the U got out of the free UUPC feeds business.  I for one
am mighty grateful the U *does* provide such a service.  I and quite a few
of the people I feed can't afford a commercial provider - it's all we can
do to maintain the hardware and phone costs to keep mail and news flowing
smoothly in the area, and reduce our independence on just one provider.

It *is* a valuable service - but that doesn't mean they have to assign a 
specific value (i.e. dollar value) to it.  Public service can be just as
valuable.

(Hey - that's why *I* do it, too)

-- 
Meg Geddes     <No admitted affiliation with anything>     Ann Arbor, MI
meg@netmeg.ann-arbor.mi.us

<I have PMS and root password.  Don't mess with me.>
Xref: sparky mi.misc:919 mi.news:210
From: bryan@notorious.rs.itd.umich.edu (Bryan Beecher)
Newsgroups: mi.misc,mi.news
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Date: 26 Jan 1993 15:29:15 GMT
Organization: U of Michigan ITD Research Systems
NNTP-Posting-Host: notorious.rs.itd.umich.edu

Edward Vielmetti writes:
>
>For my own part I would rather see the University of Michigan spend
>its attention on other public works projects and get out of the
>free UUCP feeds business, especially in the parts of the state
>where there are commercial providers and other free providers ready
>to go at the task.  Now that ITD has a big bill to pay back to the
>US Gov't for overcharging for MTS, it hardly makes any sense to me
>why they are giving away a service that's either a valuable service
>(in which case they should charge for it) or a worthless service
>(in which case they should stop doing it).  

Well, U-M is a big place, and IMHO it has enough attention for many, many
projects simultaneously.  In all honesty the marginal costs for what we
do in the UUCP biz is very low.  This is due to a couple of factors:

	o We have eliminated about 80% of the UUCP-based news feeds we
	  were giving out.  This means that the machine used for this
	  service does a lot less compressing and batching.

	o We don't poll anyone.  So we don't have any phone bills to
	  pay.

	o We don't really provide any kind of "customer support."  If you
	  don't know what you're doing, and your stuff backs up on our
	  machine, we'll cut you off.  We can't spend time handling this
	  kind of stuff.

The costs then are the marginal cost of doing some UUCP-based news and
allowing other sites to dial-in to get a tiny amount of mail.  Staff time
is only involved when setting up an account or eliminating one, and either
one of these involves very little time.  Since Wes does most of this, he's
the one to give the authoritative word.

To my mind we provide a different service than a place like MSEN.  You want
reliability, go to MSEN.  You want customer support, go to MSEN.  You want
prompt action, go to MSEN.  We are no-frills, but I think the service we
do provide is decent enough that it is still valuable.

We have gone around and around in circles on charging for this service.
The current thinking seems to be that the costs involved in the accounting
and billing would outweigh the costs in providing the service, and so
it isn't practicable.  

This is just my take on the issue; the view from the trenches, and should
not be taken as having come from anyone who actually gets to make decisions
or set policy or anything like that.
-- 
Bryan Beecher, U-M Information Technology Division (+1 313 747 4050)
Domain:	Bryan.Beecher@umich.edu      Path:  ..!uunet!destroyer!bryan
From: mjo@iao.ford.com (Mike O'Connor)
Newsgroups: mi.misc
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Date: 26 Jan 1993 20:48:29 GMT
Organization: Not an official spokesperson for Ford Motor Company
Reply-To: Mike O'Connor <mjo@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost

In article <rkushner.0jsg@sycom.mi.org> rkushner@sycom.mi.org (Ronald
Kushner) writes:

:Really?? Your mail to here works great?  My sister at Western Michigan has to 
:use sycom!rkushner@msen.com to mail me, they don't seem to understand 
:rkushner@sycom.mi.org...

Sounds like your sister's mailer at WMU doesn't understand MX records.
address@msen.com works 'cause the mailer can hammer on msen.com's SMTP
port over the Internet.  address@sycom.mi.org failts 'cause the mailer
can't hammer on Life In Hell's SMTP port over the Internet.  The fact
that it's hammering on any SMTP port without checking MX records is bad.

						...Mike

-- 
 Michael J. O'Connor           |  Internet:  mjo@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com
 Ford Motor Company, OPEO      |  UUCP:      ...!{backbone}!fmsrl7!mjo
 20000 Rotunda, Bldg. 1-3001   |  Phone:     +1 (313) 248-1260
 Dearborn, MI  48121           |  Fax:       +1 (313) 323-6277
Xref: sparky mi.misc:916 mi.news:208
From: scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons)
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Organization: Industrial Technology Institute
Distribution: mi
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:29:09 GMT

bryan@notorious.rs.itd.umich.edu (Bryan Beecher) writes:

>How would people feel about a slow transition to remove the MI.ORG domain
>in favor of the MI.US domain?  I'd still be willing to act as a front-end
>for people who needed some help getting registered.

I'd certianly have no objections -- and maybe a sudden influx of mi.us
sites would make the ISI folks more willing to hand over local control.
A quick grep/sort/uniq thru the mi maps shows 36 mi.us sites and 48
mi.org sites.
-- 
	"You can't get here from here."
Newsgroups: mi.misc,mi.news
From: jon@ais.org (Jon Zeeff)
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Organization: UMCC
Distribution: mi
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 22:27:00 GMT

I can see only two advantages to mi.org.  The name is shorter (ok, ann-arbor
is my fault), and mi.org can have wildcard MX records.

Other than that, mi.us works well.


zeeff@b-tech.ann-arbor.mi.us
Xref: sparky mi.misc:898 mi.news:196
From: chad@quality.ta.ford.com (Chad Childers)
Newsgroups: mi.misc,mi.news
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Date: 22 Jan 1993 19:05:06 GMT
Organization: Technical Affairs, Ford Motor Company
Distribution: mi
Reply-To: Chad Childers <chad@quality.ta.ford.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pms035.pms.ford.com
X-Disclaimer: Not an official spokesman for Ford Tech Affairs
Originator: chad@pms035

>get rid of the domain!

Er, I'm against this  proposal too, but if you decide to kill it, there's
really not much we can do.  Of course, I run a .mi.org site, so I care...
because it's worked really well for me, and I also send a lot of mail to
.mi.org sites, and that works dependably.  Notably, my mail to sycom.mi.org
hamjudo.mi.org, and dojo.mi.org works fine, while a bunch of mail I had
going out to m-net.ann-arbor.mi.us and grex...mi.us bit the big one.

>talk at the last IETF about reserving the EDU domain for four-year colleges
>and universities, and placing other schools under <state>.US.

Okay, so keep schools out of .mi.org... if there's a .k12.mi.us, that's fine,
but I think .mi.org still fulfills a valid role as well.

-- 
Chad Childers                            Work: chad@quality.ta.ford.com
FMEAplus Project Leader                  Home: chad@deep.mi.org
Newsgroups: mi.misc,mi.news
From: jsr@dexter.mi.org (Jay S. Rouman)
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Organization: Private System, Mt. Pleasant, MI, USA
Distribution: mi
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 00:26:48 GMT

In article <1joucsINNf5g@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu> bryan@notorious.rs.itd.umich.edu (Bryan Beecher) writes:
>How would people feel about a slow transition to remove the MI.ORG domain
>in favor of the MI.US domain?  I'd still be willing to act as a front-end

Well, we seem to be split into two camps:  a) those of us with mi.org
sites who like the shorter name, the fact that it works well, and
don't particularly want the pain of changing; and b) those with mi.us
sites who don't particularly care.

Surprise, surprise.

I don't see the urgent need to fix what ain't broke, but if it's too
much work, I can live with the change.
-- 
Jay Rouman  (jsr@dexter.mi.org  jsr@ais.org)
From: hatley@granite.pa.dec.com (Alan Hatley)
Newsgroups: mi.misc
Subject: question
Date: 25 Jan 93 11:32:32
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Distribution: mi
NNTP-Posting-Host: granite.pa.dec.com

i have a question for the 2 ford people in this group.  is it possible for
an individual to buy a number of vehicles at fleet prices without going
thru a dealer?  i have no idea how this individual intends to use these
vehicles, but they are located in sf bay area, and want to buy explorer
type vehicles.  heres a chance to raise the dividend.  ;-}

Alan-
Xref: sparky mi.misc:928 mi.news:213
From: bryan@notorious.rs.itd.umich.edu (Bryan Beecher)
Newsgroups: mi.misc,mi.news
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Date: 28 Jan 93 17:18:06 GMT
Organization: U of Michigan ITD Research Systems
NNTP-Posting-Host: notorious.rs.itd.umich.edu

Chad Childers <chad@quality.ta.ford.com> writes:
>
>                                               Would any of you push for 
>um.cc.umich.ann-arbor.mi.us?  Or um.cc.umich.ann-arbor.mi.ac.us?  That's what
>we should do if the US and Michigan aren't anything special.

Chad's probably just kidding here, but . . . .  In this case, EDU is the
standard domain for four-year educational institutions.  And so the name
UMICH.EDU fits in "just right."
-- 
Bryan Beecher, U-M Information Technology Division (+1 313 747 4050)
Domain:	Bryan.Beecher@umich.edu      Path:  ..!uunet!destroyer!bryan
Xref: sparky mi.misc:912 mi.news:206
From: mjo@iao.ford.com (Mike O'Connor)
Newsgroups: mi.misc,mi.news
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Date: 25 Jan 1993 12:08:06 GMT
Organization: Not an official spokesperson for Ford Motor Company
Distribution: mi
Reply-To: Mike O'Connor <mjo@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost

In article <scs.727732893@wotan.iti.org> scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons) writes:

:>Ahhh...  the three high schools that I see in your DNS seem to be
:>under k12.mi.us, rather than some-city.mi.us.  How do the people who
:>run .ca feel about a k13.{province}.ca for their high schools?
:
:RFC-1386 actually covers this . . . they have recommendations for
:naming these entities within the state geographic domains on page
:12.

RFC-1386 does NOT provide for the .ca domain (its title is "The US
Domain").  And I see big sites in the .ca domain moving toward .edu.
Should a Canadian high school go for the .ca or the .edu?

						...Mike

(who feels that six-deep addresses are kinda like X.400 -- scary!)

-- 
 Michael J. O'Connor           |  Internet:  mjo@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com
 Ford Motor Company, OPEO      |  UUCP:      ...!{backbone}!fmsrl7!mjo
 20000 Rotunda, Bldg. 1-3001   |  Phone:     +1 (313) 248-1260
 Dearborn, MI  48121           |  Fax:       +1 (313) 323-6277
From: emv@msen.com (Edward Vielmetti)
Newsgroups: mi.misc
Subject: Re: IP for home costs
Date: 28 Jan 1993 18:26:11 GMT
Organization: Msen, Inc. -- Ann Arbor, Michigan
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.msen.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Paul Haas estimates $47.50/mo for a dedicated IP line.  (Which sounds
about right).  The $1/mo/user figure was based on the assumption that
you could squeeze 50 users (one or two at a time) onto that sort of
connection, where they might be IP connected only a few minutes or
maybe up to an hour a day.

--Ed
Newsgroups: mi.misc,mi.news
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Organization: Who, me???
Distribution: mi
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 19:39:21 GMT

In article <scs.727730949@wotan.iti.org> scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons) writes:
>bryan@notorious.rs.itd.umich.edu (Bryan Beecher) writes:
>
>>How would people feel about a slow transition to remove the MI.ORG domain
>>in favor of the MI.US domain?  I'd still be willing to act as a front-end
>>for people who needed some help getting registered.
>
>I'd certianly have no objections -- and maybe a sudden influx of mi.us
>sites would make the ISI folks more willing to hand over local control.

But there are no guarantees, right?

>A quick grep/sort/uniq thru the mi maps shows 36 mi.us sites and 48
>mi.org sites.

Sounds like people have already voted for mi.org with their hosts.

I've got yet another host here I'd be willing to register in mi.org, if 
it's a matter of tipping the scales even further... :-)

							- Kevin
Newsgroups: mi.misc,mi.news
From: scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons)
Subject: Re: MI.ORG
Organization: Industrial Technology Institute
Distribution: mi
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 20:01:33 GMT

mjo@iao.ford.com (Mike O'Connor) writes:

>In article <1joucsINNf5g@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu>
>bryan@notorious.rs.itd.umich.edu (Bryan Beecher) writes:

>:MI.US is becoming increasingly populated.  High schools around Michigan are
>:getting connected, and they are part of the domain.  There was also a lot of
>:talk at the last IETF about reserving the EDU domain for four-year colleges
>:and universities, and placing other schools under <state>.US.

>Ahhh...  the three high schools that I see in your DNS seem to be
>under k12.mi.us, rather than some-city.mi.us.  How do the people who
>run .ca feel about a k13.{province}.ca for their high schools?

RFC-1386 actually covers this . . . they have recommendations for
naming these entities within the state geographic domains on page
12.
-- 
	"You can't get here from here."