home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.bbs.waffle
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!psuvax1!postscript.cs.psu.edu!fenner
- From: fenner@postscript.cs.psu.edu (Bill Fenner)
- Subject: Re: TRUNCATED BATCH(es)
- Message-ID: <BtK8JJ.78L@cs.psu.edu>
- Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: postscript.cs.psu.edu
- Organization: Penn State Computer Science
- References: <3414@ra.nrl.navy.mil> <7e5XPB1w164w@bolis.SF-Bay.org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:16:30 GMT
- Lines: 18
-
- In article <7e5XPB1w164w@bolis.SF-Bay.org> amillar@bolis.SF-Bay.org (Alan Millar) writes:
- |fenner@cmf.nrl.navy.mil (William C Fenner) writes:
- |> That's another point -- RFC's only apply to the Internet. Since UUCP
- |> connection != Internet, you can't point to an RFC and expect it to apply.
- |
- |This reasoning is why so many gateways don't work. If everyone followed
- |the RFCs in places where they are appropriate, we wouldn't have so many
- |unreliable mail systems.
-
- But some RFC's just _don't_ apply - like RFC821, and RFC822's suggestion of
- <CR><LF> seperated lines. I wasn't suggesting to completely ignore the
- RFC's; I was just pointing that although the RFC's may be the bible of
- the Internet, they don't *necessarily* all apply to UUCP.
-
- Bill
- --
- Bill Fenner fenner@cs.psu.edu ..psuvax1!hogbbs!wcfpc!wcf
- wcf@hogbbs.scol.pa.us (+1 814 238-9633 v.32bis)
-