🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4106@teddy.UUCP> jpn@teddy.UUCP (John P. Nelson) writes:
>[...]
>Now, suppose that all of site1, site2, and site3 talk '@' addresses, but
>site1 and site2 only know UUCP domain, and site3 is still the NETWORK gateway.

A gateway is allowed (maybe required, I'm not sure) to rewrite as neccessary
when forwarding messages between networks.  Therefore you could send to
	site1!site2!site3!foo.network!user
and the dest addr will be rewritten to be
	user@foo.network
when site3 forwards it.  What to set the From: line to in that situation, I
don't know.  As I weary of this whole discussion, I begin to wish that the
RFCs would recognize bangs as a low-precedence operator, since the route-addr
form with all the colons and commas looks really really ugly.  But there is
a way to do even that -- routing in the ARPAnet.  Something like
	:site3.network,:site2,:site1,you@home
but don't quote me.  Whatever form it takes, site3 as the gateway could
rewrite from that to the bang-form.  That will make replies to the message
work okay; getting the original message through is the easy part, and that's
all you asked about.

>HOW do I send mail now?  Does site1 HAVE to understand .NETWORK?  I think
>this is unreasonable, especially when I already KNOW how to get mail to
>.NETWORK (I relay through site1, site2, and site3!).  Can I say:
>user@foo.NETWORK@site3.UUCP@site2.UUCP@site1.UUCP?  Does this work?

Nope, only one @ per address.  But there IS a route-form, I promise!  I just
don't remember the syntax.  Help?

>Maybe I'm just confused...

You and me and everybody else, too.
-- 
Paul A Vixie Esq
329 Noe Street       {ptsfa, crash, hoptoad, ucat}!vixie!paul
San Francisco        ptsfa!vixie!paul@ames.ames.arc.nasa.gov
CA  94116            paul@vixie.UUCP     (415) 864-7013