home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.sys.dec:5957 comp.mail.misc:3688
- Path: sparky!uunet!destroyer!fmsrl7!ef2007!slee01!mjo
- From: mjo@slee01.srl.ford.com (Mike O'Connor)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.dec,comp.mail.misc
- Subject: Re: dxmail on ULTRIX
- Followup-To: comp.mail.misc
- Date: 13 Nov 1992 21:08:33 GMT
- Organization: Not an official spokesperson for Ford Motor Co.
- Lines: 29
- Message-ID: <1e15ghINN2oi@ef2007.efhd.ford.com>
- References: <1992Nov11.142812.9171@panix.com> <1drnfhINN3cj@ef2007.efhd.ford.com> <1992Nov12.182035.24694@decuac.dec.com>
- Reply-To: "Mike O'Connor" <mjo@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: slee01.srl.ford.com
-
- Followups redirected. This is a mail issue, now.
-
- In article <1992Nov12.182035.24694@decuac.dec.com> avolio@dco.DEC.COM
- (Frederick M. Avolio) writes in response to 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.
-
- "blah!blah%blah.UUCP@blah.blah.blah" is the address format in question.
-
- Using mixed "!" and "%" in the address is undefined -- both "@" and
- "%" are routing hacks that I wouldn't consider part of a "good
- address". Moreover, anything that references the pseudo-domain .UUCP
- is asking for trouble. I guess your definition of "good" and mine
- varies.
-
- ...Mike
-
- --
- Michael J. O'Connor | Internet: mjo@FMSRL7.SRL.FORD.COM
- Ford Motor Company, OPEO | UUCP: ...!{backbone}!fmsrl7!mjo
- 20000 Rotunda, Bldg. 1-3001 | Phone: +1 (313) 248-1260
- Dearborn, MI 48121 | Fax: +1 (313) 323-6277
-