Article View: comp.mail.misc
Article #2554Re: Which headers may Sendmail re-write?
From: Chip Salzenberg
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 1991 03:48
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 1991 03:48
40 lines
2572 bytes
2572 bytes
According to les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell):
>In article <277A64CD.4C4B@tct.uucp> chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>>I still object to the rewriting of RFC822 addresses into bang paths.
>
>How would you handle the RFC822-legal path!user@domain syntax when
>handing it to a uux-ed rmail?
For the envelope (rmail argument), make it domain!path!user. For the
header, *don't change it*. Remember the basic argument: the From:
line is an RFC822 animal. Software that parses From: must therefore
do so by the rules of RFC822, or by definition it's broken.
>>In the address "bang!path!dom.ain!user", the _added_ information
>>("bang!path") is the problem, because it is very often an incomplete,
>>pessimal or unreliable route.
>
>Philosophically, I don't like any form of rerouting other than to the
>specified "next-hop" host, but realistically it is probably better
>to re-route to the right-most FQDN. That should only fail under
>a couple of circumstances: (1) the user really wanted the specified
>routing for testing or avoiding a known problem with the usual routing.
Agreement 100% here, except that I'm slightly more willing to be
guided by my philosophical view and by my desire to avoid problems
under the given circumstance (1). I've therefore avoided the use of
Rabid Rerouting in our mail transport.
The only form of Rabid Rerouting performed at TCT is done in our mail
user agent (Elm) and only at explicit user request (the header edit
screen has a "domainize" command). I thus avoid the common fallacy
that machine X knows better than person Y, which is always false for
appropriate values of Y. (The value of X doesn't matter.)
My point in requesting the cessation of u@d.m -> d.m!u rewriting is
that even my own mild form of Rabid Rerouting wouldn't be needed if
only RFC822 headers could get to my site without being mangled.
--
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT <chip@tct.uucp>, <uunet!pdn!tct!chip>
"Please don't send me any more of yer scandalous email, Mr. Salzenberg..."
-- Bruce Becker
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<2781581A.6663@tct.uucp>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!daver!tscs!tct!chipReferences:
<Dec.26.03.10.52.1990.29900@turbo.bio.net> <277A64CD.4C4B@tct.uucp> <1990Dec31.190906.328@chinet.chi.il.us>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!daver!tscs!tct!chip From: chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg) Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc Subject: Re: Which headers may Sendmail re-write? Message-ID: <2781581A.6663@tct.uucp> Date: 2 Jan 91 03:48:42 GMT References: <Dec.26.03.10.52.1990.29900@turbo.bio.net> <277A64CD.4C4B@tct.uucp> <1990Dec31.190906.328@chinet.chi.il.us> Organization: Teltronics/TCT, Sarasota, FL Lines: 40