home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!crdgw1!rdsunx.crd.ge.com!rdsunx!barnett
- From: barnett@grymoire.crd.ge.com (Bruce Barnett)
- Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
- Subject: Re: Parsing internal DECnet-like addresses
- Message-ID: <BARNETT.92Nov9100009@grymoire.crd.ge.com>
- Date: 9 Nov 92 15:00:09 GMT
- References: <1992Nov3.151220.11227@oar.net>
- <VIXIE.92Nov3131100@cognition.pa.dec.com>
- <1992Nov4.133353.11007@prl.dec.com>
- <VIXIE.92Nov6113558@cognition.pa.dec.com>
- Sender: usenet@crd.ge.com (Required for NNTP)
- Reply-To: barnett@crdgw1.ge.com
- Organization: GE Corp. R & D, Schenectady, NY
- Lines: 24
- In-Reply-To: vixie@pa.dec.com's message of 6 Nov 92 11:35:58
- Nntp-Posting-Host: grymoire.crd.ge.com
-
- In article <VIXIE.92Nov6113558@cognition.pa.dec.com> vixie@pa.dec.com (Paul A Vixie) writes:
- > DECWRL::MRGATE::A08::A08::"Fred Avolio"
-
- I saw this in DEC's sendmail and shuddered. Perhaps I am ignorant of
- DEC's routing mechanism. Why use a route instead of an address? Is
- this because some DEC machines don't understand addresses and must use
- routes? I believe we have a network coordinator that makes sure all
- machines have a unique name. If the name is unique, why does there
- have to be a route?
-
- I modified up our sendmail.cf file so that all From: addresses
- from an internal site gets converted into a
-
- user@machine.network.ge.com
-
- format, be it Microsoft Mail, UUCP, DECNET, or sendmail. So the above
- address could be converted into, say,
-
- Fred.Avolio@a08.mrgate.ge.com
-
- Can't DEC do something similar? Why do they insist on using routes
- instead of addresses? We all know how mixed mode addresses cause problems...
- --
- Bruce Barnett <barnett@crd.ge.com> uunet!crdgw1!barnett
-