Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site akgua.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!glc
From: glc@akgua.UUCP (G.L. Cleveland [Lindsay])
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: more on domains
Message-ID: <1748@akgua.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 20-Oct-85 09:53:12 EDT
Article-I.D.: akgua.1748
Posted: Sun Oct 20 09:53:12 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 21-Oct-85 00:58:02 EDT
References: <3774@garfield.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Technologies/Bell Labs, Atlanta
Lines: 34

As usual, Lauren points to a basic "truth" that sometimes gets
overlooked:

>From vortex!lauren
>I should mention that one of my basic rules is that my domain handling
>must BREAK NOTHING in the current environment, and must not REQUIRE
>cooperating "smart" sites to work.  

I see the results of this quite often here at "akgua".  Mail is
sent thru here to "nextsite!joe@uucp" or "nextsite!joe.uucp", and
"nextsite" has a vanilla-flavor "rmail" program to handle this.
The result usually is that user "uucp" at my site gets the failure
message from "nextsite" since it only understands the old "remote from"
header lines and can't generate a more accurate return path.  One
tries to be helpful and the message is usually re-sent (manually)
to the intended recipient using the old "bang" addressing.

The usual culprit is the originating site with its "smart" address
modifier.  Bottom line...the lowest common denominator is the
"bang" mail handlers.  That method usually works on all of the uucp
sites.  (I'm not addressing cross-domain gateways here.)

So as you debate methods and addressing standards, bear in mind
"Lauren's Law" (slightly reworded):

   New mailers must BREAK NOTHING in the current environment, and
   must not REQUIRE other sites to change their software in order
   to work.

Cheers,
  Lindsay

Lindsay Cleveland  (akgua!glc) (404) 447-3909   Cornet 583-3909
AT&T Technologies/Bell Laboratories ... Atlanta, Ga