Xref: utzoo news.admin:15540 comp.mail.misc:5813 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!uunet!wang!fitz From: fitz@wang.com (Tom Fitzgerald) Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.mail.misc Subject: Re: Bogus .UUCP addresses, was: Is UUNET going to upgrade? Message-ID: Date: 26 Jun 91 02:05:10 GMT References: <9106151249.48@rmkhome.UUCP> <1991Jun21.025904.3563@osh3.OSHA.GOV> <1991Jun21.214642.8746@mthvax.cs.miami.edu> <1991Jun22.173931.19979@agate.berkeley.edu> Distribution: na Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA, USA Lines: 16 wisner@mica.Berkeley.EDU (Bill Wisner) writes: > An Internet host doesn't have to > deal with .UUCP addresses, though, particularly since the "user@host.UUCP" > construct has no official standing -- it's as much an underground hack as > % notation. If you want to make it easy on your users, fine -- configure > your mailer to punt .UUCP addresses to a gateway. But don't think it's > required. Well nothing's *required* but don't understate how useful it is. Roughly 10% of the articles in the news spool here have .UUCP return addresses. A site that can't send mail to these addresses is preventing its users from responding to a whole lot of posts. --- Tom Fitzgerald Wang Labs fitz@wang.com 1-508-967-5278 Lowell MA, USA ...!uunet!wang!fitz