🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1353@munnari.oz> kre@munnari.oz (Robert Elz) writes:
>In article <597@cullvax.UUCP>, news@cullvax.UUCP writes :
>> Incoming ARPA messages used to come to us with headers saying things like
>> 	From: arpa-feed!user@arpa.site
>> which worked fine--one could reply to it, etc.  Recently this has
>> changed (the "arpa-feed!" part isn't added)
>> ....
>> It used to work and now it doesn't.  Am I being unreasonable?
>
>Yes, I think you are.  To do what you want properly, your feed site
>would have to know the characteristics of every site it feeds (and really,
>every site, everywhere) and generate addresses in the form that that
>site likes.  That's absurd.  Much better is to have a standard, and
>have everyone comply with that.
>
>If that means that some sites have to upgrade their software, then
>that's just the way it is.  Reconcile yourself to this.
>
>Robert Elz			postmaster@munnari.oz

While all that you claim may indeed be reasonable to you, please note 
that many of us do not have the option of implementing a mailer that is
not supported by the equipment or software vendor.  Even for those of us
who do have access to sources and/or considerable support talent, there is
considerable time and effort involved in converting from one standard to
another.  It is also the case that the learning curve is often flatter than
we would wish.  

For the most part, the news system has provided transition tools wherever
possible and I have considerable admiration for the manner in which updates
and improvements have been handled.  On the other hand, for a postmaster to
tell a client that he should refer to Figure 1. seems to be out of character
for the net in general and the postmaster function in particular.  I would
think that the postmaster would want to get the problem fixed as promptly as
possible.  It isn't so much that he should serve the client as it is that 
the problem is likely consume his time anyway.

John Cornelius
(...!sdcsvax!piaget!jc)