Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!mips!twg.com!david
From: david@twg.com (David S. Herron)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Problems with MMDF and UUCP mail
Message-ID: <7927@gollum.twg.com>
Date: 12 Sep 90 17:02:27 GMT
References: <0ae6o2w163w@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us> <7921@gollum.twg.com> <1990Sep12.122549.21039@robobar.co.uk>
Reply-To: david@twg.com (David S. Herron)
Organization: The Wollongong Group, Palo Alto, CA
Lines: 90

In article <1990Sep12.122549.21039@robobar.co.uk> ronald@robobar.co.uk (Ronald S H Khoo) writes:
>In article <7921@gollum.twg.com> david@twg.com (David S. Herron) writes:
>
>>> the headers aren't correct.  First of all, the From_ line lists the
>>> mail as from user "mmdf" instead of the user that actually sent the
>>> mail.
>
>> Usually I see this as coming from "uucp" and usually it only happens
>> on System V machines.  I never bothered to understand why it happens,
>> if only because I usually run MMDF on BSD machines.  But then it works
>> fine on my Unix PC at home soooo...
>
>I understood the original posting to mean that the From_ line on the
>RECEIVING machine (by implication _not_ running MMDF) to be wrong in
>being just "mmdf" and thought it was to do with the fact that the
>current UUCP channel does not invoke uux with the -aremote.domain!remote-user,
>(at least at update #43 it doesn't -- VERY sad -- I'm going to have to add it
>before I switch to MMDF) Was that understanding wrong ?

I dunno why the -a option wasn't used..  in fact this is the first time
I've ever heard of that option and my first thought it was something
on a specific version of UUCP that I don't have access to.  But I just
checked on Sun OS 4.1, SysVr3.2 and 4.3-Tahoe, and it was on all of 'em.
Sigh..  I guess that's my new thing to learn for the day, I might as well
go home now ;-).

As to whether this is a problem?  Sendmail sites generally have the
UUCP originator be `daemon' so I don't see how that's very different
from MMDF sites having the originator be `mmdf'.  Can you explain further?

Why should the UUCP originator show up in From<space> lines?  (Situation
which I am imagining at this point: sender at an MMDF site.  UUX/UUCP
originator is `mmdf'.  From<space> at originating site says `user'.  Gets
delivered elsewhere.  In order for From<space> line to say `mmdf' that
has to be changed somewhere.  But all the rmail's I've seen simply scan
through From<space>'s and >From<space>'s and concatenate strings.  So
where would this change be made?)



>BTW is the mmdf2@relay.cs.net list active ?  I haven't seen _any_ messages since
>I asked for a list expansion address to be added a couple of weeks ago ...

Yes.. we've had a little discussion recently (this week) about how
the Host Requirements RFC relaxed RFC-822 a bit such that the former
requirement for:

	From: phrase <local@domain>

now doesn't require the phrase.  (e.g. "From: <local@domain>" is enough).

But the address parser won't work with this format because it sees '<'
as the beginning of something to read in a list of addresses from a file.

So, anyway.. yes, there's been some activity.  You should probably contact
mmdf2-request@relay.cs.net again..


>I *do* wish that MMDF workers would discuss their work openly in a USENET
>group, and am always grateful for the artcles on MMDF from DSH.  Is there
>a hysterical reason why MMDF *isn't* discussed on USENET ?  Where would
>be a good place to ask questions about it ?  (I have a few burning ones :-)

er.. ah.. I *am* an MMDF worker.

If I were to forced to come up with a h{i,y}st{e,o}rical reason for it
not being discussed out here it would be:

-- The previous groups of workers are/were from the Arpanet Mailing List
   tradition which tends to look down upon Usenet.  (Indication: The `send'
   and `resend' programs (for sending and re-sending mail) in MMDF assume
   the ~/.signature file is suitable for the `phrase' part of the From:
   line..  take a look at my .signature below ;-))
-- The traffic on the mailing list has never been heavy enough to justify
   a newsgroup.
-- There is a generally low opinion of MMDF which, as far as I can tell,
   derives from Olden Days when MMDF was truly buggy.  Nowadays it is very
   unbuggy, except in the documentation which is a bit lacking (sigh) ..
   at any rate the rep isn't quite deserved.

I think I had another reason but it seems to have slipped away.. ohwell.

comp.mail.misc is just as good a place as any to talk about MMDF.  If the
traffic warrants we might just be able to wangle a newsgroup ;-).

-- 
<- David Herron, an MMDF & WIN/MHS guy, <david@twg.com>
<- Formerly: David Herron -- NonResident E-Mail Hack <david@ms.uky.edu>
<-
<- Sign me up for one "I survived Jaka's Story" T-shirt!