Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 (Fortune 01.1b1); site graffiti.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!qantel!dual!lll-crg!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!shell!graffiti!peter
From: peter@graffiti.UUCP (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: The TRUTH about .UUCP
Message-ID: <273@graffiti.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 2-Oct-85 12:27:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: graffiti.273
Posted: Wed Oct  2 12:27:41 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 7-Oct-85 05:04:55 EDT
References: <593@down.FUN> <10476@ucbvax.ARPA> <12317@Glacier.ARPA> <10490@ucbvax.ARPA>
Distribution: net
Organization: The Power Elite, Houston, TX
Lines: 15

> 	2) The current bang addressing scheme is old and has outlived
> 	   its usefulness.

I don't see this. The only problem I see with the bang scheme is that sites
are ignoring it. If they gave it precedence over ARPA and other non-bang
syntax it'd work fine...

	If (the address contains BANGS &&
	    I am adjacent to the next site in the path)
		Send it to them;

	Use whatever heuristics you want to handle ambiguous paths, but if
you get a UUCP message that is addressed to the site next door to you, DON'T
look any further! Just pass it on. After you have dealt with vanilla UUCP
mail, the way it used to be, then you can do gateway stuff.