Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!gatech!seismo!brl-tgr!tgr!gds@SRI-SPAM.ARPA From: gds@SRI-SPAM.ARPA (Greg Skinner) Newsgroups: net.mail.headers Subject: Re: Quiz - Parse this From line Message-ID: <903@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Thu, 19-Dec-85 16:31:59 EST Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.903 Posted: Thu Dec 19 16:31:59 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 21-Dec-85 06:15:07 EST Sender: news@brl-tgr.ARPA Lines: 42 >> From noscvax!@MIT-MC.ARPA:hpfcla!hpcnoe!veeger!hpcnou!dat@hplabsd Since Dave Taylor said that the message came from someone at hp-sdd, whic is not on the ARPA Internet as far as I know, and is not constructing 822 addresses, the From line can be read as such: hp-sdd <-- noscvax noscvax <-- mit-mc mit-mc <-- hplabsd hplabsd <-- hpcnou (though 4 hops) The reply works in this case because MIT-MC saw fit to do source routing, which is probably not a bad idea for mail coming from UUCP. If the message came from someone on a smart UUCP site that did 822 header munging, or was on both ARPA and UUCP, the rightmost @ would be favored, that's where the mess begins. It is possible for UUCP sites to address outside of UUCP using bang format. For example, the above address could be folded into: noscvax!hplabsd.arpa!....!hpcnou!dat Note I left MIT-MC out of the picture. MIT-MC just redistributed the message -- it did not originate it, and has no right to be included in reply text. I suspect possible munging of From or From: lines. However, if you insist on seeing MIT-MC in there, noscvax!mc.mit.lcs.edu!hplabs.arpa!....!hpcnou!dat Gateways/mail bridges *ought* to do the transformation between ! and 822 formats, that's what they're there for. One of the purposes of a gateway is to do protocol transformations on messages which is clearly what is needed here. No one in UUCP need know about @ or any other such nonsense -- as long as they know the qualified names of the sites they are sending to, they should be free to construct paths through the gateways with legal UUCP syntax, with the gateways doing the appropriate transformations. --gregbo