Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucsd!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway From: enag@ifi.uio.no (Erik Naggum) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400 Subject: Re: UUCP handling slash in ORAddress Message-ID: Date: 7 Oct 90 06:39:15 GMT References: <47920012@hpindda.cup.hp.com> Organization: Naggum Software, Oslo, Norway Lines: 33 Approved: usenet@ICS.UCI.EDU In-Reply-To: khiem@hpindda.cup.hp.COM's message of 6 Oct 90 17:59:18 GMT x-attn: jns ReSent-To: mhsnews@ICS.UCI.EDU In article <47920012@hpindda.cup.hp.com> khiem@hpindda.cup.hp.COM (Khiem Ho) writes: There was some discussion a while back about the ORAddress in string form. Various systems now use the convention "/attribute=value". We have encountered some problem with using the "/" in ORAddress with UUCP (Honeyman-D????). Have anyone encountered other problems with slash in ORAddress with UUCP? What an anachronism! Is this because you try to use that infernal ORaddress syntax in some kind of UUCP<->Internet<->X.400 gateway thing? "X.400 croaked for want of a slash." :-D If you run UUCP <-> X.400 gateways, why not send the binary image to some special program on the other side which understands the X.400 message? No need to resort to the RFC 1138/48 (whatever) or RFC 987 mapping. UUCP is supposed to be 8-bit clean, anyhow. Oh, well, if someone takes this seriously and does it, let me know. Another solution is perhaps to write out some batch smtp stuff and mail it off to a b-smtp program which can decode that envelope. Or invent something new. Whatever. But please, please, don't consider the character set legal on an rmail command line (UUCP "envelope") as important enough to think seriously about. It may not go away, but there are better ways around that problem than to restrict the character set of ORaddresses. Believe me, I know all about those restrictions. -- [Erik Naggum] Naggum Software; Gaustadalleen 21; 0371 OSLO; NORWAY I disclaim, , therefore I post. +47-295-8622, +47-256-7822, (fax) +47-260-4427