Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!karl_kleinpaste From: karl_kleinpaste@cis.ohio-state.edu Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp Subject: Re: Paths and Precedence (Re: Question about From: lines) Message-ID: Date: 10 Jul 90 13:38:42 GMT References: <++J4QGC@xds13.ferranti.com> Sender: news@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Organization: Ohio State Computer Science Lines: 29 peter@ficc.ferranti.com writes: But, still, DNS source-routing is incredibly ugly. Peter, quit putting up that straw man. It's getting irritating. Source routes are part of RFC822. But _nobody_ likes them. They're hated so badly and so universally that RFC1123 revises the situation and actually tries to shut them down, giving the option that a site can be fully compliant while flatly ignoring source routes. RFC1123, section 5.2.6, page 52: DISCUSSION: The intent is to discourage all source routing and to abolish explicit source routing for mail delivery within the Internet environment. Source-routing is unnecessary; the simple target address "user@domain" should always suffice. This is the result of an explicit architectural decision to use universal naming rather than source routing for mail. Thus, SMTP provides end-to-end connectivity, and the DNS provides globally-unique, location-independent names. MX records handle the major case where source routing might otherwise be needed. Source routes suck. Everybody knows it. Stop arguing an empty point. --karl -- "Reading news with GNUS gives the phrase `garbage collecting' a whole new meaning." --jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu