Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83 based; site houxm.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!gregbo
From: gregbo@houxm.UUCP (Greg Skinner)
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: Uucp mail headers
Message-ID: <1201@houxm.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 18-Apr-85 11:39:59 EST
Article-I.D.: houxm.1201
Posted: Thu Apr 18 11:39:59 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 19-Apr-85 00:33:21 EST
References: <688@plus5.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 33
Keywords: uucp project, sendmail, rmail

I'd like to add a question to Hokey's.

Are we assuming in the uucp mail project that all participating machines will upgrade
to sendmail, or at least modify rmail to pass on mail generated or handled by sendmail?
(I'm not trying to enforce use of sendmail, btw.)  

If not, and I know for the time being all my machines won't have sendmail, the

From uucp ...
>From uucp remote from site1
...

headers will be used.  I would recommend that these style headers (hereafter referred to
as Unix mail headers) be the default that is looked for by whatever mail delivery pro-
grams are written, since we can't assume that the majority of Unix mailers on UUCP will
have sendmail.  Also, it is guaranteed that you can build a reply address from the >From
lines, not necessarily with the From: lines.

I would also caution rewriting UUCP mail headers converting from >From lines to 
Received: lines, unless for the sake of the sites that generated the >From lines an
inverse transformation program can be applied to replies changing Received: lines to
>From lines.  Also, how would mail forwarding be handled?

... sigh ...
I remember a year and a half ago when I said that domains would probably take care of
all the mess.  Seems like they've just complicated things.
-- 
			... hey, we've gotta get out of this place,
    			    there's got to be something better than this ...

Greg Skinner (gregbo)
{allegra,cbosgd,ihnp4}!houxm!gregbo
gregbo%houxm.uucp@harvard.arpa