Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site down.FUN
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!down!honey
From: honey@down.FUN (Peter Honeyman)
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: More thoughts on mail relays
Message-ID: <622@down.FUN>
Date: Sat, 16-Nov-85 00:21:43 EST
Article-I.D.: down.622
Posted: Sat Nov 16 00:21:43 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 16-Nov-85 09:28:53 EST
References: <322@ncr-sd.UUCP>
Organization: CS Dept., Princeton University
Lines: 35

greg describes a gruesome case of hybrid address generation; let me
fill in the details.  i sent mail to nosc!greg, which pathalias turned
into princeton!seismo!nosc.arpa!greg.  nosc forwards greg's mail to
ncr-sd.  return addresses were generated as follows:

	host		return address
	----		--------------
	down		honey
	princeton	down!honey
	seismo		princeton!down!honey
	nosc		princeton!down!honey@seismo.css.gov
	ncr-sd		noscvax!princeton!down!honey@seismo.css.gov


note that seismo changed syntax; seismo is gatewaying into rfc-land,
where local-part@domain is required.  (incidentally, i concur with this
treatment.)  note that nosc \did not/ do it's part when gatewaying back
into bang-land, and further confused matters by using different host
names for arpa and uucp.

while pathparse disambiguates the resulting address with ease, nosc
would be a better citizen if it converted

	princeton!down!honey@seismo.css.gov

to

	seismo.css.gov!princeton!down!honey

when gatewaying to bang-land.

as to whether smail has the answer, i wouldn't expect much; the smail
crowd seems adamant about rejecting existing practices.

	peter