🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <600@vixie.UUCP>, paul@vixie.UUCP (Paul Vixie Esq) writes:
> In article <16238@amdcad.AMD.COM> bandy@amdcad.UUCP (Andy Beals) writes:
> # [just tack on host! and use rmail and] [M]ail will go through
> # because it's worked this way for years.

> Mail *may* go through because of all the people between you and your
> mailee who are running broken and non-standard software.

Is software "broken" because it accepts some things which do not
Conform to the Standard?  (Note: "accepts", not "does".)

However, bandy is close to right.  I'll take working over conforming
any day.  I had to change our sendmail configuration from RFC822 route
addresses (@x,@y:u@z) to RFC7-something (u%z%y@x) because nearly every
*other* piece of software which had to interpret the resulting
addresses broke, taking the commas to indicate a list of addresses.
Often, in spite of enclosing <>s (which, incidentally, I never did
manage to make sendmail generate correctly).

> I get mail bounced too.  If everyone would conform to the published
> standards, it wouldn't happen (so often :-)...

If everyone would conform to *any* set of standards, it wouldn't happen
so often.  The problem is not a lack of standards, or a problem with
the standards; it is a lack of uniformity (ie, a lack of compatibility
with one another).

					der Mouse