🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <14033@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> dheller@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Dan Heller) writes:
>I think I made an error in this statement:
...
>> some general info:
>> RFC822 requires using commas between addresses so as to identify them
>> from other addresses.
...
>I am probably wrong about RFC822 because it might not say anything about
>multiple addresses on the same line.  I'm at home now, so I can't check
>my RFC which is at work :-)  However, it is certainly accepted protocol
>to separate addresses with commas -- sendmail requires it as well as many
>other RFC-compliant MTAs.  The reason for this is that addresses can have
>multiple words in it:
>    island!argv (Dan Heller) @ sun.com

Comma's *are* required ...




>This interferes with a valid addressing scheme that Bart and I call
>"weird" addresses because altho they are legal, they are inconvenient
>because they contain commas.  e.g. a legal address might look like:
>    @host.dom.ain,@cad.berkeley.edu:argv@island.uucp

Actually you're required to put <>'s around that construct -- I suppose
to hide the "," from being seen by an address parser.  What I wonder is
why they wanted to use comma's here in the first place?  It's as clear
to use :'s where they want to use comma's.



-- 
<- David Herron; an MMDF guy                              <david@ms.uky.edu>
<- ska: David le casse\*'      {rutgers,uunet}!ukma!david, david@UKMA.BITNET
<- By all accounts, Cyprus (or was it Crete?) was covered with trees at one time
<- 		-- Until they discovered Bronze