🚀 go-pugleaf

We at DDATHD21.BITNET received a mail with the following header:

> Received: from columbia.edu by wiscvm.wisc.edu on 01/07/86 at 13:19:50 CST
> Received: by columbia.edu (5.31/5.10) id AA06692; Tue, 7 Jan 86 14:18:14 EST
> From: phri!pluto!warren@columbia.edu
> Received: by phri.UUCP (4.12/4.7)
>     id AA23384; Tue, 7 Jan 86 13:57:29 est
> Date: Tue, 7 Jan 86 13:57:29 est
> Message-Id: <8601071857.AA23384@phri.UUCP>
> To: XBR1YD22%DDATHD21.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu
> Subject: (  deleted due to data security   )
> In-Reply-To: your article <902@caip.RUTGERS.EDU>

The header is OK.
But the mail was not addressed to "XBR1YD22" as specified in the RFC-header.
The mail was delievered to "SEISMO!X". The ARPA <-> BITNET gateway at
WISCVM truncates f.e. the user field "SEISMO!XBR1YD22" of
"SEISMO!XBR1YD22@DDATHD21.BITNET" to "SEISMO!X" because only 8 characters
are allowed in BITNET. Some mailer must have forgotten to remove the
"SEISMO!" in the transport information.

Whose mailer doesn't process such mails correctly?

Reinhard Goeth
Technical University of Darmstadt
Fed. Rep. of Germany

ARPA address:    XBR1YD14%DDATHD21.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
BITNET address:  XBR1YD14 @ DDATHD21 (no NETDATA please)