home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.dec
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!sgiblab!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!decuac!decuac!avolio
- From: avolio@dco.DEC.COM (Frederick M. Avolio)
- Subject: Re: dxmail on ULTRIX
- Message-ID: <1992Nov12.182035.24694@decuac.dec.com>
- Lines: 19
- Sender: news@decuac.dec.com (USENET News System)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: gildor.dco.dec.com
- Reply-To: avolio@dco.DEC.COM (Frederick M. Avolio)
- Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Washington ULTRIX Resource Center
- References: <1992Nov11.000045.29463@ll.mit.edu> <1992Nov11.142812.9171@panix.com> <1drnfhINN3cj@ef2007.efhd.ford.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 18:20:35 GMT
-
-
- In article <1drnfhINN3cj@ef2007.efhd.ford.com>, mjo@slee10.srl.ford.com (Mike O'Connor) writes:
- >:>It's a good address because I had someone on a SUN forward it for me.
- >
- >It's NOT a good address. "!" mixed with "@" and "%" mixed with "@"
- >can cause problems, and "!" and "%" mixed with "@" usually DOES cause
- >problems.
-
-
- Nonsense. It is a perfectly good address. Good, bad, and ugly are
- three different things. It is an ugly address. It is confusing only to
- someone who doesn't know the rules (@ has precedence), and for broken
- sendmail.cf files.
-
- ULTRIX's standard sendmail.cf is broken in that it did not give @ priority
- the way most of the world does. It has been fixed in OSF/1 and in the
- original posters situation as well.
-
- f
-