home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!alisa.com!dakota!denny
- Newsgroups: comp.mail.headers
- Subject: Re: Reply-To: rewrite
- Message-ID: <1992Sep6.201610.5497@alisa.com>
- From: denny@alisa.com (Bob Denny)
- Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 20:16:10 GMT
- References: <715016429@anthrax.cs.duke.edu><11-PCNews-124beta@pos.pub.uu.oz.au>
- Organization: Alisa Systems, Inc.
- Lines: 30
-
- In <11-PCNews-124beta@pos.pub.uu.oz.au>
- Mark.Purcell@pos.pub.uu.oz.au (Mark Purcell) writes:
-
- > [...]
- >
- > I am of the opinion that if an address if a FQDN that it shouldn't be UUCP
- > munged as a FQDN should make sense from anywhere :-).
- >
- > Any thoughts?
-
- Yes, I agree! As far as I am concerned, it has been LONG ENOUGH for bang
- path addressing (and it's SMTP cousin, @-path addressing) to be exorcised
- from end-user exposure. That stuff is low-level source routing, and is the
- property of the mail transport. RFC976 specifies it for uucp, and RFC821
- specifies it for SMTP. Messing with the RFC822 headers of a message should
- be verboten.
-
- Unfortunately, enough people haven't caught up to the modern way on UUCP,
- so it's "safe" to pre-route a return path and/or a from. All this does is
- prolong the agony.
-
- "If you can't route UUCP (no pathalias/maps), send your messages to a
- system that can (smart-host)" -- Bob Denny, September 1992.
-
- :-) :-) :-)
-
- _______________________________________________________________________________
- Robert B. Denny voice: (818) 792-9474
- Alisa Systems, Inc. fax: (818) 792-4068
- Pasadena, CA (denny@alisa.com, ..uunet!alisa.com!denny)
-