🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <BsJq4z.686@andy.bgsu.edu> jmiller@andy.bgsu.edu (Jim Miller) writes:
>However, the command on the uucp job has the address re-written into an
>idiotic Bang-ized RFC822 format:

Of course it is.  "rmail" is a UUCP MTA, and is not guaranteed to have
any concept of @-style RFC-822 addressing.  If you want to be at all
compatible with the outside world, you will only hand rmail addresses
that it is guaranteed to handle.  Some mailers (i.e., smail3 and
sendmail) allow you to configure this, but you had best be very
careful that you verify correct behavior before you turn this on.

The address passed to the "rmail" command is the envelope address,
anyway, and can be (and should be!) modified as necessary on each hop
of the route to ensure correct delivery.  There's no reason for the
user to ever see that address.

>Obviously "andy.bgsu.edu!jmiller" is NOT what I intended.  bgsuvax
>handles "rmail abc@d.e.f" just fine, but doesn't like the bang-ized
>format of "d.e.f!abc".

If bgsuvax's rmail doesn't accept "rmail d.e.f!abc", but does accept
"abc@d.e.f", then they should fix their MTA.  RFC-976 clearly states
that the former format ("bang domain" format) is the preferred method
for envelope-to addresses between UUCP hosts.

-- 
Marc Unangst                | Real men don't make backups.  Real men never
mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us   | accidentally delete files that they're going
<backbone>!sharkey!mudos!mju| to need later.

According to jmiller@andy.bgsu.edu (Jim Miller):
>   The mail is getting punted as it should, EXCEPT for the address
>that is contained in the rmail command.  The headers in the actual mail
>message are OK (I have looked at them in the uucp spool directory).
>However, the command on the uucp job has the address re-written into an
>idiotic Bang-ized RFC822 format:
>

This is the only thing that MMDF can do.  The interface to mail
via uucp is well defined.  rmail is guaranteed to take bang
addresses (old rmails only take one recipient on the command
line).

>If I send mail to "jmiller@andy.bgsu.edu" the job gets queued as:
>
>bgsuvaxN2a99  08/06-00:56  S  bgsuvax  mmdf 281 D.wendy65e49fe
>              08/06-00:56  S  bgsuvax  mmdf  rmail andy.bgsu.edu!jmiller 
>
>Obviously "andy.bgsu.edu!jmiller" is NOT what I intended.  bgsuvax
>handles "rmail abc@d.e.f" just fine, but doesn't like the bang-ized
>format of "d.e.f!abc".

No, it _is_ what you intended.  a.b.c!user and user@a.b.c are
exactly the same address, in different notation.  IF bgsuvax's
rmail can't handle a bang on the command line, then its rmail
is BROKEN.

>
>If I understand things correctly, the uucp channel program is doing this.
>In my mmdftailor file, I have tried "ap=822" and "ap=same", trying
>to get the channel to leave the address alone.  

The 'ap' parameter only affects the headers.  The uucp channel
is performing protocol conversion, translating an RFC 822
address into the correct format for the UUCP network.  A
(hypothetical) decnet channel would turn 'user@node' into
'node:user' before passing it along.