Article View: comp.mail.misc
Article #2232Re: a!b@c
From: Leslie Mikesell
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:53
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:53
44 lines
2497 bytes
2497 bytes
In article <1992Nov11.171241.20094@news.acns.nwu.edu> skrenta@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Rich Skrenta) writes: >I used to think that a!b@c meant "give the message to a with address >b@c" (Perhaps that's what smail 2.5 did?). Lately I've been seeing >lots of address binding @ the other way: "deliver to c with address a!b". > >In other words, which is it: > > a!b@c -> @c:a!b > a!b@c -> @a:b@c Here's the problem: sites running stock uucp mail (i.e. what AT&T sold at least up to SysVr3) never look past the first !. They will thus send such an addres to site "a" which will interpret the remaining part "b@c". There is no provision for changing this behaviour without replacing the mail transport program on these machines. (Smail is one such replacement). In spite of this, the internet standard is to deliver to the site to the left of the @ sign letting that machine interpret the remaining part, so a machine running SMTP would deliver to site "c", giving it the remaining address "a!b". So you can't use this kind of address unless you know which machine has which kind of mailer. What's worse is that the internet standards demand addresses to be in the user@domain form and uucp mailers don't provide them. Thus the uucp->internet forwarder must provide a return address like: uucp!path!user@forwarder.domain which is fine within the SMTP realm, but when the message is passed back to a uucp site the headers are generally not modified again and will probably be misinterpreted. >And what of: > > b%a@c This notation was introduced to avoid the problem of mixing ! and @. On the uucp side it's best to use RFC 976 notation - i.e hop1!hop2!hop3!domain!user, since it doesn't require knowledge of the type of mailer used by the intermediate sites and it is understood by virtually all uucp->smtp gateways. Unfortunately nothing works reliably the other direction. Most internet mailers are of the opinion that if you don't have a domain name you don't exist, regardless of the evidence to the contrary. Les Mikesell les@chinet.chi.il.us
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<BxM48z.3B6@chinet.chi.il.us>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!darwin.sura.net!wupost!uwm.edu!linac!uchinews!machine!chinet!lesReferences:
<1992Nov11.171241.20094@news.acns.nwu.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!darwin.sura.net!wupost!uwm.edu!linac!uchinews!machine!chinet!les From: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) Subject: Re: a!b@c Message-ID: <BxM48z.3B6@chinet.chi.il.us> Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX References: <1992Nov11.171241.20094@news.acns.nwu.edu> Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:53:22 GMT Lines: 44