Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!karl_kleinpaste From: karl_kleinpaste@cis.ohio-state.edu Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc Subject: Re: is uunet breaking your headers? Message-ID: Date: 25 May 90 13:09:24 GMT References: <8955@gouda.quad.com> Sender: news@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Organization: Ohio State Computer Science Lines: 49 me: > If you use sendmail, in S3 do: > R$*.$*!$* $3@$1.$2 invert to @-format > but only after verifying that there are no @'s in the address already. > (That is, my use of the above rule is as the last stage of my Domain > Absolutist Rabid Rerouter ruleset trio.) david@quad1.quad.com writes: I suppose. I thought that S3 wasn't quite the place to put it; In fact, I was afraid to put it into S1 as well, since that would affect mail "just passing through" my site. I consider S3 to be the right place to do it because S3 is called first for the purpose of canonicalization into the most correct form. Or so I view it, anyway. And yes, it affects mail "just passing through." I consider this a feature, not a bug. Furthermore, I suspect that the above rule matches more addresses than I would care to see attacked anyway - Wouldn't this turn "some.place!some.other.place!user" into "user@some.place.some!other.place"? Or do I misunderstand the pattern matching rules? The rule does the right thing, given that it's the last of the previously mentioned 3. The complete set is: R$*.$*!$*@$* $1.$2!$3 lose @-portion R$*!$*.$*!$* $2.$3!$4 strip excess left-hand R$*.$*!$* $3@$1.$2 invert to @-format Note that the 2nd one is responsible for getting rid of all the left-hand dotted-domain specifications except the last one. Then the 3rd one turns it around. (I suppose I should have posted the whole set in the previous article, to avoid this confusion. Ohwell.) Before anyone flames that I'm violating numerous standards in the 1st rule by deleting the RHS even if it's not "me," please first show me _existing_, _real_world_ failure cases where this heuristic doesn't work. Yes, it's formally a violation of the RFCs; no, it doesn't hurt anything on a practical basis, and since the practical basis is the goal (i.e., get mail delivered), I have a clear conscience on that. And while we're at it, please avoid the flames over Rabid Rerouting of !-paths, either General RR or my much more restricted Domain Absolutist version; again, it works, and we've gone over that ground at least twice in the last year or so. The only known failure case was fidonet.org, and that has been resolved. --karl