Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!kodak!uupsi!vmp!oc From: oc@vmp.com (Orlan Cannon) Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc Subject: Re: Which headers may Sendmail re-write? Message-ID: <1990Dec22.180814.10207@vmp.com> Date: 22 Dec 90 18:08:14 GMT References: <1990Dec14.174541.14252@Think.COM> <276D13B4.6732@tct.uucp> <1990Dec18.182210.12980@Think.COM> <27710D99.140E@tct.uucp> Organization: Video Marketing & Publications, Inc., Oradell, NJ Lines: 41 In article <27710D99.140E@tct.uucp> chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg) writes: > >Munging addresses in *headers* just because dumb UUCP sites need bang >paths in the *envelope* is misdirected at best. This is indeed the crux of the matter. Intelligent munging of envelopes is considered "a good thing". The problem is with MUAs that insist on using RFC822 headers for replies but are distributed with MTAs that know nothing about RFC822 (or 976 or 1123, for that matter). AT&T, are you listening? Mailx knows about RFC822 headers and replies to the "From:" line. It passes the message to /bin/mail, which thinks it must be a strange local address... Munging the headers is just a defensive tactic against AT&T's errors. The fact that semi-intelligent MUAs and MTAs are freely available, at no cost, is avoiding the fact that most computer installations don't want to think about it. They don't want to have to install smail or elm or mush. They bought the system and that's that. The answer is to talk to your UUCP neighbors. Ask what kind of MTA or MUA they use. Mung the headers accordingly. Don't make a universal rule of it. We've got plenty of universal rules that work just fine. Local exceptions are *OK*. As long as *you and your neighbor* know what you're doing. Talking about it on the net doesn't help. Talking with your local UUCP neighbor does. UUNET, are you listening? -- Orlan Cannon oc@vmp.com Video Marketing & Publications, Inc. (800) 627-4551 Oradell, NJ 07649