Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!mimsy!cvl!umd5!zben From: zben@umd5 (Ben Cranston) Newsgroups: comp.mail.headers Subject: Re: help Message-ID: <1375@umd5> Date: Mon, 24-Nov-86 18:42:58 EST Article-I.D.: umd5.1375 Posted: Mon Nov 24 18:42:58 1986 Date-Received: Mon, 24-Nov-86 23:40:19 EST References: <606@mtunf.UUCP> <2338@psuvax1.UUCP> Reply-To: zben@umd5.umd.edu (Ben Cranston) Distribution: net Organization: University of Maryland, College Park Lines: 43 Keywords: gateway Summary: PSUVAX1 isn't exactly above reproach... > The machine psuvax1 is on both USENET and BITNET. It can be used as a > gateway as follows: ... > It would appear that some BITNET mailers have a warped sense of what a > valid address is and what is allowed to appear in a mail header. Hear hear. I've been operating an Internet to BitNet gateway since 1984, and I have quite a mugbook of some of the utter trash various BitNet mailers seem to think is valid. However, I do have a comment on the PSUVAX1 gateway. We were recently out of touch with our usual Internet to UUCP gateway (due to unrelated problems) so I took the opportunity to try using PSUVAX1 for some of my personal mail. I got some advisories back. None had any kind of "To:" field, a field required by RFC822 and used by my software to attempt to recover from BitNet's stupidity in truncating out-of-band addresses to eight characters. Needless to say my software didn't appreciate the lack of "To:" fields, and proceeded to break. Fortunately I am notified of mail system glitches and was appropriately chagrined to find said glitches traceable to mine own hand... Regardless of the lack of order and standardization on BitNet I don't think it wise for you to criticize while your own software is part of the problem. Apologies in advance to anyone this might offend. --------------- From: uucp@ihnp4.UUCP Received: by psuvax1.UUCP (4.12/4.7) id AA01844; Tue, 4 Nov 86 19:34:47 est Date: Tue, 4 Nov 86 19:34:47 est Received: by ihnp4.ATT.COM id AA05988; 4 Nov 86 13:13:56 CST (Tue) Subject: Warning from uucp Apparently-To: psuvax1!UMD2.BITNET!ZBEN (Message text.) PSUVAX1 should have put a "To: ZBEN@UMD2" header field in. UMD2 would have done the same for PSUVAX1 :-) -- umd5.UUCP <= {seismo!umcp-cs,ihnp4!rlgvax}!cvl!umd5!zben Ben Cranston zben @ umd2.UMD.EDU Kingdom of Merryland Sperrows 1100/92 umd2.BITNET "via HASP with RSCS"