Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site peora.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!petsd!peora!jer
From: jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos)
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: .UUCP domain and "sendmail"
Message-ID: <1711@peora.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 9-Oct-85 07:48:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: peora.1711
Posted: Wed Oct  9 07:48:25 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Oct-85 06:48:49 EDT
References: <10361@ucbvax.ARPA> <3700008@ndm20> <2841@sun.uucp> <8937@ritcv.UUCP>
Organization: Perkin-Elmer SDC, Orlando, Fl.
Lines: 22

> Guy's proposal is the first one I've seen which has any promise of
> working.

I find this statement somewhat annoying, given the fact that the position
which I had maintained for nearly a month when I was arguing for a method of
graceful conversion to the support of domains was exactly the same one Guy
Harris had proposed, except that I spelled out in detail how to do it.  You
may recall that my arguments against @-precedence were specifically because
it *required*, rather than *allowed*, people to adopt the RFC822-syntax and
the use of the !-syntax domain notation.

One of the reasons for all the confusion and disagreement is that, when
presented with a "let's do something about this" proposal, everyone says
"great idea," but when they are presented with proposals for the details of
the implementation, everyone throws up their hands and says, "too
complicated! too confusing! look at this counterexample! it won't work!"
-- 
Shyy-Anzr:  J. Eric Roskos
UUCP: Ofc:  ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jer
     Home:  ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jerpc!jer
  US Mail:  MS 795; Perkin-Elmer SDC;
	    2486 Sand Lake Road, Orlando, FL 32809-7642