Article View: comp.mail.sendmail
Article #3337Re: sendmail parsing questions: "%"
From: Craig F. Everhart
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1989 16:46
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1989 16:46
11 lines
1287 bytes
1287 bytes
> *Excerpts from ext.nn.comp.mail.sendmail: 24-Apr-89 Re: sendmail parsing* > *questi.. Larry Parmelee@wayback.c (1466)* > Thanks to RFCs 822 and 976, the mail address operators "!" and > "@" have a defined meaning and precedence in relation to each > other: at least for internet hosts, "@" has the highest > precendence. Where does "%" fit in relative to "@" and "!"? You never have to worry about the ``%'' operator unless there are no other operators in the address. The hard problem is the relative (and probably source-dependent) precedence of ``@'' and ``!''; ``%'' always has the lowest precedence, since no transport mechanism other than the final one is supposed to look at it.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<cYJ_3dy00VsL466rV5@andrew.cmu.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!cfe+References:
<357@anvil.oz> <701@arisia.Xerox.COM> <1635@ur-cc.UUCP> <oYImy1y00VsL80WYtI@andrew.cmu.edu>, <27172@cornell.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!cfe+ From: cfe+@andrew.cmu.edu (Craig F. Everhart) Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail Subject: Re: sendmail parsing questions: "%" Message-ID: <cYJ_3dy00VsL466rV5@andrew.cmu.edu> Date: 25 Apr 89 16:46:33 GMT References: <357@anvil.oz> <701@arisia.Xerox.COM> <1635@ur-cc.UUCP> <oYImy1y00VsL80WYtI@andrew.cmu.edu>, <27172@cornell.UUCP> Organization: Information Technology Center, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA Lines: 11 In-Reply-To: <27172@cornell.UUCP>