Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!intercon!amanda@intercon.uu.net From: amanda@intercon.uu.net (Amanda Walker) Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail Subject: Re: Re^6: Short-circuiting a route Message-ID: <1142@intercon.UUCP> Date: 30 Jun 89 22:36:41 GMT References: <4197@tank.uchicago.edu> <1930@lokkur.UUCP> <562@daitc.daitc.mil> <89Jun28.104844edt.10373@neat.ai.toronto.edu> <29-Jun-89.124341@192.41.214.2> <1890@itivax.iti.org> Sender: news@intercon.UUCP Reply-To: amanda@intercon.uu.net (Amanda Walker) Organization: InterCon Systems Corporation Lines: 28 In article <4197@tank.uchicago.edu>, matt@oddjob.uchicago.edu (Matt Crawford) writes: > By the fact that I and a couple of hundred pals will come over and throw > sand in your disk drive and let the smoke out of your CPU. Grin. That sounds about right. When dealing with addressing, just because it's "legal" doesn't make it reasonable. For example, sending U.S. mail from almost anywhere in the U.S. to Beijing, China is almost impossible if you include the Chinese postal code. Why? Because no matter how big you right "CHINA" or "P.R.C." on the envelope, the Beijing postal code is five digits that look just like the ZIP code for a small town in the midwest, and your mail will go there. If you have a site that looks & smells like an Internet host, and wants to both use a name that looks like an Internet domain name and talk to machines that are actually on the Internet, it had better play by the Internet's rules. This isn't a law, it's just that if you don't, your mail won't get through, as you have discovered. -- Amanda Walker InterCon Systems Corporation -- "Those preachers are right--there's more in these songs than meets the eye..." --Arlo Guthrie