HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: greyham@research.canon.oz.au (Graham Stoney)
Subject: Re: AIDS and the common cup
Organization: Canon Information Systems Research Australia
Distribution: aus
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 06:07:50 GMT

ricko@ee.uts.edu.au (Rick Jelliffe) writes:
>greyham@research.canon.oz.au (Graham Stoney) writes:
>>Do you know if there's any biblical basis for this strange metamorphism?.
>>As far as I can see, Christ told us to "do this in rememberance" of him; the
>>bread and wine are symbolic of his body and blood suffering for us - but he
>>didn't appear to say that they actually _were_ his body and blood, or that we
>>could expect them to become so as if by magic through some ceremony.

>>Is there anything I've missed?

>Yes. Our doing it is a rememberance of him, and the bread and wine are
>certainly symbolic of him. But they are not only symbolic.

>Jesus said very clearly "This is my body... this is my blood...".

Well, to start with he didn't say it in English, so I don't see that it's so
clear at all. It sounds a lot more like a metaphor to me:

met7a7phor \'met-e-,foG(e)r also -fer\ n
1: a figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one kind of
object or idea is used in place of another to suggest a likeness or analogy
between them (as in drowning in money)

There was also no suggestion that we should expect the bread and wine to
magically become his body or his blood when we take communion; the very
thought of it is grotesque and the whole idea is totally at odds with the
physical appearance of the bread and wine, which still look much like bread and
wine.

>                             That the literal interpretation of his words 
>is also reasonable (defineable within a rigourous logical system) is
>the doctrine of transubstantiation, which explains it from within an
>Aristotelean/ Thomistic system of substance and accidents. 

Which sounds like inventing a complex theory to support a simple
misinterpretation. Correcting the misinterpretation would be much easier.

Christ's message is so simple; why do people need to complicate it?.

Graham
-- 
Graham Stoney.                                    Ph: 805-2909. Fax: 805-2929.
Virtually all those on death row in the US are poor, mentally ill or retarded,
or belong to minority races and those who are executed are often all of the
above. The death penalty is discriminatory.
Newsgroups: aus.religion
From: kre@cs.mu.oz.au (Robert Elz)
Subject: Re: mail to "brisnet.org.au" problem
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 07:27:24 GMT

In <jwb.714802730@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au> jwb@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au (Jim Breen) writes:

| "a.priv.au" seems only marginally better than X.121 all-numeric addresses.

You're right, I don't much like it, if I did it would probably exist already.

| At least go for a structure with some mnemonic qualities.

Please, someone suggest one - but first work out what it should be
a mnemonic for ...

I'd really prefer not to do the state based thing, as I would like
people's mail addresses to remain unchanged should they move from
miserable Melbourne to sunny Qld or such ... sticking "vic" or something
in the address means that people either want to change it, or it seems
stupid (even if it works just fine) after the move.

kre
Newsgroups: aus.mail
From: Christopher.Vance@adfa.oz.au (Christopher JS Vance)
Subject: Re: mail to "brisnet.org.au" problem
Originator: cjsv@ccadfa.cc.adfa.oz.au
Organization: Computer Science, University College, UNSW/ADFA, Canberra, Australia
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 11:42:05 GMT

In article <9224017.23439@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> kre@cs.mu.oz.au (Robert Elz) writes:
| | Could you really see the demand getting that big that you'd want
| | a seperate letter to break them up?
| 
| Even if it was divided based on states - yes - I'd hate to be the poor
| sucker stuck with the job of maintaining a list of every home computer
| in Melbourne, let alone the rest of the state.

How can we divide names of private machines into smaller domains for
easing DNS administration, while not being geographically based.

1) Have 26 (36 if you include digits) subdomains of priv.au, the
subdomain being a single letter and allocated by being the same as the
first (or last?) letter of the hostname, e.g.,

	fred.f.priv.au		blurt6.6.priv.au
	hacker.h.priv.au	snorer.r.priv.au


Yes, I know it's lousy, but I think any scheme for such a potentially
large collections of hosts is likely to be.

2) If machines were restricted to being named after people, we could
use their initial, and I could have vance.c.priv.au.

3) The subdomain of priv.au could be derived by hashing the hostname.

4) We could use a function of the date it was registered.

5) Or ...

-- Christopher
Newsgroups: aus.mail
From: kre@cs.mu.oz.au (Robert Elz)
Subject: Re: priv.au namespace
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Distribution: aus
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 02:26:37 GMT

In <1992Aug31.234012.17114@bby.com.au> djk@bby.com.au (David Keegel) writes:

| My expectation is that there will not be a huge number of sites registered
| in priv.au,

Your expectation is not nearly forward looking enough.

| mainly because of the fact that AARNet charges (directly or
| indirectly) a right-to-use the network fee

Which is totally irrelevant, no-one has ever claimed that sites with
names in AU have to be AARNet users, there's no reason all the fidonet
users in Aust can't register more rational names than that weird
combination of letters and digits they use, and have their mail shipped
around exclusively by fidonet.  Similarly for other nets, etc.

The namespace does not belong to aarnet.

| So, where is this great volume of sites to inhabit priv.au going to come
| from?

A better question might be "Can you guarantee that there will never be
more than a few hundred individual's systems registered for mail?"

If not, then its better to err on the side of caution, and allow for
the possibility.   Remember, its not what will happen now that matters,
its what will happen in the next 10-20 years.

| Perhaps the members
| of an organisation like APANA might like to be in priv.au in case they want
| to leave APANA and set up their own organisation or join someone else's, but
| it seems simpler to be host.apana.org.au (once that domain becomes official).

If I were such a person, I'd certainly prefer the former.

kre
From: s892024@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. Muirden [GA])
Newsgroups: aus.mail
Subject: Re: mail to "brisnet.org.au" problem
Date: 26 Aug 92 19:33:58 GMT
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre, Melbourne Australia.

kre@cs.mu.oz.au (Robert Elz) writes:

>I'm not much enamoured of geographic domains (as name.town.state.us)
>especially in that rigid format, but nor am I sure what else is
>better, perhaps just "a.priv.au" or something, where "a" is just
>a random letter of the alphabet chosen just to divide up the
>domains into groups (could be multi letter eventually, or even
>immediately if there's a reason).

>Suggestions welcome.

OK here's my 2 cents, why not combine the two and have:

	node.state.priv.au
	eg:
	node.vic.priv.au

Could you really see the demand getting that big that you'd want
a seperate letter to break them up? I think the .priv.au is a
good idea though.

What about the private (or some anyway) systems in the .pub.uu.oz.au
domain?

>kre

-richard

ps: whatever happened to the great aus.* news reorg? :)

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard A. Muirden, System Administator, Wesley College :)
E-Mail: ram@lionet.wesley.OZ.AU, s892024@minyos.xx.rmit.OZ.AU, ram@tintern1.?? 
----------------- Fanatic of Shostakovich and "Star Trek" ---------------------
Newsgroups: aus.mail
From: jwb@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au (Jim Breen)
Subject: Re: mail to "brisnet.org.au" problem
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 04:18:50 GMT

kre@cs.mu.oz.au (Robert Elz) writes:

>In <jwb.714788292@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au> jwb@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au (Jim Breen) writes:

>| rob@contempt.brisnet.org.au

>| All attempts to reply result in a bounce. Can anyone help?

>That's my fault (in a sense) - I've been unable to convince myself
>that brisnet.org.au belongs as an org.au domain, so I haven't
>registered it.   You can probably get there if you explicitly route
>via bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au

Thanks, I got some mail off without susequent bounces.

>I'm not much enamoured of geographic domains (as name.town.state.us)
>especially in that rigid format, but nor am I sure what else is
>better, perhaps just "a.priv.au" or something, where "a" is just
>a random letter of the alphabet chosen just to divide up the
>domains into groups (could be multi letter eventually, or even
>immediately if there's a reason).

>Suggestions welcome.

"a.priv.au" seems only marginally better than X.121 all-numeric addresses. At
least go for a structure with some mnemonic qualities. A "priv" domain seems
a good idea; I just thing we need more meaningful identifiers than "a", "b", etc.

-- 
Jim Breen                           JIS:$B%8%`!!%V%j!<%s(J
Department of Robotics & Digital Technology. Monash University. 
PO Box 197 Caulfield East VIC 3145 Australia (ph) +61 3 573 2552 
(fax) +61 3 573 2345  AARNet/Internet:jwb@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au  
Newsgroups: aus.mail
From: djk@bby.com.au (David Keegel)
Newsgroups: aus.mail
Subject: Re: priv.au namespace
Date: 31 Aug 92 23:40:12 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: Burdett, Buckeridge & Young Ltd., Melbourne, Australia

Before we start having a Mass Debate on what the ident for priv.au should
be, could someone please explain to me why we need an ident?

My expectation is that there will not be a huge number of sites registered
in priv.au, mainly because of the fact that AARNet charges (directly or
indirectly) a right-to-use the network fee (which as kre has pointed out
is *not* buying an MX, however much it may seem that way) which is quite
high when compared to the average individual's budget.

So, where is this great volume of sites to inhabit priv.au going to come
from?  Is it going to be as additional MXes for organisations already in
com.au, edu.au, gov.au, csiro.au, org.au?

I presume that AARNet would not allow BBY to register an MX for bond.priv.au
or keegel.priv.au based on BBY's Mail Affiliate status.  Perhaps the members
of an organisation like APANA might like to be in priv.au in case they want
to leave APANA and set up their own organisation or join someone else's, but
it seems simpler to be host.apana.org.au (once that domain becomes official).

So my questions are: (A) How many individuals are prepared to pay >= $575
out of their own pocket? (B) How many individuals would be recognised by
AARNet as part of some larger organisation which has paid the right-to-use,
but the individual would like to register a private address rather than
one within that organisation?

Unless the numbers from A + B are greater than the number of subdomains of
com.au or edu.au, I do not see the need to subdivide priv.au.
-- 
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| David Keegel   <djk@bby.com.au>   Ph: +61 3 614-8922   Fax: +61 3 614-8742 |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: s892024@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. Muirden [GA])
Newsgroups: aus.mail
Subject: Re: priv.au namespace (was Re: mail to "brisnet.org.au" problem)
Date: 28 Aug 92 20:18:10 GMT
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre, Melbourne Australia.

rhys@cs.uq.oz.au (Rhys Weatherley) writes:

>Here's another suggestion, similar to C. Vance's.

>	surnametag.ident.priv.au

>where "surnametag" is derived from the user's surname, say with the first
>7 letters and a digit.  e.g. "elz1", "weather2", etc.  "ident" is some uniquely
>AARNet-allocated identifier to split the namespace up better.  What are these
>identifiers to look like?  Search me.  Derived from the current date?

Not a bad idea, but most people would prob. like their machine to
have a 'fancy' name or 'cute' not just their name... if you know
what I mean by that :-)

Course we could always divide it up by the month they registered:

	hostname.month.priv.au

or how about their salary?

	hostname.rich.priv.au hostname.poor.au hostname.filthy-rich.priv.au 

well ok, I'm getting a little crazy here :) It comes of being in too many
aus.* news reorg debates ;-)

>	machine.surnametag.ident.priv.au

yup


>One more thing before I shut up: will a "priv.au" MX registration come with
>a $1,000 AARNet-usage fee?  Very few private individuals can wear that kind of
>cost (together with the service provider costs), especially when they don't
>generate as much traffic as the universities, corporations, etc.  One of the
>motivations behind forming BrisNet was to share the costs around so that it
>becomes possible to get news and mail, even on a shoestring budget.  4Mb a
>month is an awful lot of mail traffic for one person.  There are lots of
>people out there itching to "get on", but get discouraged at the costs.

Well I'd suggest they do what the APANA (the pub.uu.oz.au lot) do, that
is each member pays $50 or so, and together they coff up the $1,000
needed. So in the priv case, if we had 100 people doing this, each
paying $10, then that's not so much is it? But then a snag develops
if kre wants subdomains to the priv.au then wouldn't the members of
that subdomain have to pay $1,000 each (as in $1,000 for a.priv.au
andf $1,000 for b.priv.au and so on... ?)

just random mutterings...

>Cheers,

>Rhys.
>--
>Rhys Weatherley, University of Queensland, Australia.
>rhys@cs.uq.oz.au  "I'm a FAQ nut - what's your problem?"

-richard

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard A. Muirden, System Administator, Wesley College :)
E-Mail: ram@lionet.wesley.OZ.AU, s892024@minyos.xx.rmit.OZ.AU, ram@tintern1.?? 
----------------- Fanatic of Shostakovich and "Star Trek" ---------------------
From: s892024@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. Muirden [GA])
Newsgroups: aus.mail
Subject: Re: priv.au namespace (was Re: mail to "brisnet.org.au" problem)
Date: 1 Sep 92 00:43:10 GMT
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre, Melbourne Australia.

The point that I was trying to make wasn't about MX's, it was about
AARNet. Would AARNet (Geoff etc) accept a single priv.au domain, with
it's members, however split up coming up with the $1,000, or would they 
be greedy and want members of domains *below* priv.au (not talking 
about MX's here at all kre :) ), to come up with $1,000 each.

I mean all it would take is 1,000 private systems (and surely this
could include anyone with a PC ruinning some kind of PC-UUCP and
a modem and a contact site, and your per user cost would be down
to $1, while the whole domain (ie: priv.au) might become unmanagable
compared to the gain (to AARNet) of providing it. 

If you see what I mean. Sorry my last post wasn't as clear. I *did*
understand the difference between what AARNet wants and the fact that
MX's are free etc etc.

Perhaps it's time Geoff or Peter put in a word here?

-richard

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard A. Muirden, System Administator, Wesley College :)
E-Mail: ram@lionet.wesley.OZ.AU, s892024@minyos.xx.rmit.OZ.AU, ram@tintern1.?? 
----------------- Fanatic of Shostakovich and "Star Trek" ---------------------
Newsgroups: aus.mail
From: kre@cs.mu.oz.au (Robert Elz)
Subject: Re: Transition away from .oz.au (was Re: mail to "brisnet.org.au" problem)
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 02:20:49 GMT

In <1992Aug28.003325.12000@bby.com.au> gnb@duke.bby.com.au (Gregory N. Bond) writes:

| What sort of options are available for sites that move away from
| SUN-III transport?

Two really - you can keep the name alive on ACSnet, by having someone
establish a foreign link to you, which is just fine.

Or, you can abandon the name completely - I don't go about deleting old
oz.au records from the DNS when that happens, so (Internet style) mail
will get through (mail from ACSnet sites will typically bounce, as that
would just be routed over ACSnet, which won't know what to do).  However,
the name has been abandoned, and once that happens anyone else who
wants it can have it - if somone picks the name you've given up then
your old DNS records will be removed (whether or not they decide to
put their entry into the DNS - having the same name mean different things
in different places would be a disaster).

kre
Newsgroups: aus.mail
From: gih900@cruskit.aarnet.edu.au (Geoff Huston)
Subject: Re: priv.au namespace (was Re: mail to "brisnet.org.au" problem)
Reply-To: G.Huston@aarnet.edu.au
Organization: AARNet
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 92 01:28:47 GMT

> What I think you want to ask is whether AARNet will allow a group of
> otherwise unrelated sites/organisations/people to join together for
> the sole purpose of paying a combined fee to aarnet rather than each
> paying separately, and if so, under what conditions?
...

>> Perhaps it's time Geoff or Peter put in a word here?
> Perhaps.

I don't think the current structure of the mail access program
can adapt well to this.

What is being pushed here ...

From the AVCC:
   a) it's (currently) a private network for use by academics and researchers
      => use is to conform to Appropriate Use policies

   b) it's user funded
      => all external users should pay their way (in some fashion)


From the "group of otherwise....."
   a) we see some value in mail access, and want to connect to the network
      => as long as its "cheap"

   b) we want a network which can be used without limitation regarding
      appropriate use
      => a system analogous to a public utility operation

Now  I'm  open  to suggestions as to what is the next step here - 'cause right
now the kludges which have lead to the acceptance of the uu.oz.au  domain  are
very unstable from an AVCC perspective. 

Perhaps  its  time  we  understood  the  nature  of the problem here, and then
started looking at mechanisms which may address these. The flat annual payment 
answered a number of issues, but incremental volume based tariff regimes  also
have a legitimate role for lower volume clients of the networked enterprise. 



SO  I've attempted not to answer any of the questions posed to date - I simply
don't think the policy-based answers I could provide are attuned to the actual 
issues going on here. I'm interested in seeing further input right now.


cheers,

Geoff

-- 
Geoff Huston,                           	e-mail: G.Huston@aarnet.edu.au
Manager,	 				phone: +61 6 249 3542
Australian Academic Research Network		fax:   +61 6 249 1369
Newsgroups: aus.mail
Subject: Re: priv.au namespace
From: Andy.Linton@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Andy Linton)
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 01:32:15 GMT
Organization: Dept of Comp Science, Victoria Uni, Wellington, NEW ZEALAND


In article <axolotl.715495928@syzygy>, axolotl@socs.uts.edu.au (Iain Sinclair) writes:
|> 
|> Also, isn't "priv.au" a slight misnomer?  Can't think of any alternatives,
|> though.

We debated this one here and came up with "gen.nz" for 'general' use.
Newsgroups: aus.mail
From: kre@cs.mu.oz.au (Robert Elz)
Subject: Re: priv.au namespace (was Re: mail to "brisnet.org.au" problem)
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 08:27:12 GMT

In <1992Aug28.151810.3463@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au>
s892024@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. Muirden [GA]) writes:

| rhys@cs.uq.oz.au (Rhys Weatherley) writes:

| >	surnametag.ident.priv.au
| >where "surnametag" is derived from the user's surname,

What should go inside "ident.priv.au" isn't the problem, I don't
see any need for any particular rule there - part of the reason for
having the "ident" (whatever it is) is that if you get a name conflict
in one "ident.priv.au" you can just register in "otherident.priv.au"
instead.

Which is all why some basically meaningless "ident" is a reasonable
idea - if there's any (particular) meaning there then they aren't
all essentially equal, and people will want some particular one over
others.  With random names (even though they're not nice) there should
not be any particular reason to prefer one over another - some individuals
may prefer one, some another, but in general they should all be roughly
equal.

| >One more thing before I shut up: will a "priv.au" MX registration come with
| >a $1,000 AARNet-usage fee?

| But then a snag develops
| if kre wants subdomains to the priv.au then wouldn't the members of
| that subdomain have to pay $1,000 each (as in $1,000 for a.priv.au
| andf $1,000 for b.priv.au and so on... ?)

Don't any of you people read anything?

Names and MX records have NOTHING to do with paying AARNet, with the
one exception that if you don't have permission to use AARNet, and
you want an MX which would imply use of AARNet, then the MX won't
appear until you have the necessary permission.

If you can convice AARNet (ie: Geoff/Peter/whoever else wants to put
their oar in) that 10, 100, or 1000 people/systems should be able to
divide up one fee (of whatever size) rather than pay AARNet individual
fees (directly, or via AUUG), then each of those people/systems has
permission to use AARNet (once the fee is paid).

At that point they could have 1 MX, or 1000 MX's - AARNet don't care.

On the other hand, if you have an MX for your system, and you make
sub-domains in it for others, without getting AARNet's permission
for them to use AARNet, that's cheating - regardless of what the
names look like.

If you want to set up a group of people to make the costs lower, then
by all means talk to Geoff about it, he's not normally an ogre.

But DON'T confuse naming issues with AARNet right to use issues, they
ARE NOT connected.

kre
Newsgroups: aus.mail
From: sysnet@cc.newcastle.edu.au (David Morrison)
Subject: Re: priv.au namespace (was Re: mail to "brisnet.org.au" problem)
Organization: University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:33:30 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.023908.18146@sserve.cc.adfa.oz.au>, Christopher.Vance@adfa.oz.au (Christopher JS Vance) writes:
> I *think* this is the situation:
> 
> News is not charged for by AARN despite the fact that its volume
> swamps mail to any single site, because the AARN site already has to
> carry news for its own purposes.  I believe that AARN sites are free
> to charge a fee for their connections, or to decline any request to
> connect.

What this implies is that the small sites should only pay the incremental cost 
of providing news, ie, since it is already at your nearest uni, you should
only have to pay for getting it from there, not contribute to getting it to 
there.  

What if a university had (say) 1000 news readers?  What if that same 
university fed (directly or indirectly) 1000 small sites?  Would it be fair
for the same "incremental cost" to apply, ie, the univerity pay for AARNet and 
the others not contribute?

At the same time as this, charging for mail is dismissed because the volume is 
so small relative to news.

I have to wonder what it is that the small sites actually value from an AARNet 
connection?  Is it mail access?  Is it news?  Would they want a connection if 
they could send and receive mail but not get news?  How much would they be 
prepared to pay for a mail-only connection?

Just stirring the pot :-)
-- 
David Morrison, Manager, Networks and Comms, Uni of Newcastle, Australia
sysnet@cc.newcastle.edu.au or (VAX PSI) psi%0505249626002::sysnet
Phone: +61 49 215397	Fax: +61 49 216910
Newsgroups: aus.mail
From: jwb@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au (Jim Breen)
Subject: mail to "brisnet.org.au" problem
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:18:12 GMT


I received some mail today from:

rob@contempt.brisnet.org.au

All attempts to reply result in a bounce. Can anyone help?


-- 
Jim Breen                           JIS:$B%8%`!!%V%j!<%s(J
Department of Robotics & Digital Technology. Monash University. 
PO Box 197 Caulfield East VIC 3145 Australia (ph) +61 3 573 2552 
(fax) +61 3 573 2345  AARNet/Internet:jwb@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au  
Newsgroups: aus.mail