Article View: comp.mail.misc
Article #4164Re: JANET troubles
From: Robert Elz
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1987 11:12
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1987 11:12
25 lines
1741 bytes
1741 bytes
In article <1574@umd5.umd.edu>, zben@umd5.umd.edu (Ben Cranston) writes: > I assume the "full domain name" means to transform "ac.uk" to "ukacrl" but > leave "<anything>.ac.uk" alone. This would probably work. It seems to. > My local problem is use of somebody else's code and database for site > lookup, and the said somebody else not wanting to include special cases > like this. On balance, I'm not sure I disagree with him... I don't really either, but its a case of making mail work. The right people to fix this are Rutherford Labs, but they don't seem to be in any hurry to do anything about it. > I guess you mean the RSCS out-of-band information is EMAILDEV and UKACRL. No, not really. I know nothing about RSCS or BITNET really, but I thought that generally mail was transferred using BSMTP. I had assumed that BSMTP would have a "Mail From:<xxx>" in its envelope. That was the one I was suggesting that Rutherford should set. If BSMTP doesn't have this header, perhaps it should? If Rutherford don't use BSMTP then perhaps they should? Robert Elz kre@munnari.oz.au
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1590@munnari.oz>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!munnari!kreReferences:
<701@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> <572@stracs.cs.strath.ac.uk> <1574@umd5.umd.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!munnari!kre From: kre@munnari.oz (Robert Elz) Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc Subject: Re: JANET troubles Message-ID: <1590@munnari.oz> Date: Mon, 27-Apr-87 07:12:43 EDT Article-I.D.: munnari.1590 Posted: Mon Apr 27 07:12:43 1987 Date-Received: Tue, 28-Apr-87 01:18:55 EDT References: <701@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> <572@stracs.cs.strath.ac.uk> <1574@umd5.umd.edu> Organization: Comp Sci, Melbourne Uni, Australia Lines: 25 Keywords: JANET, UK, gateways, help! Summary: Still more on AC.UK (no controversy, no-one is disagreeing...)