Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cornell!parmelee
From: parmelee@wayback.cs.cornell.edu (Larry Parmelee)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: ambiguity.
Keywords: Inet->uucp    rfc822 vs rfc976
Message-ID: <26320@cornell.UUCP>
Date: 22 Mar 89 14:33:12 GMT
References: <4857@hubcap.clemson.edu>
Sender: nobody@cornell.UUCP
Reply-To: parmelee@wayback.cs.cornell.edu (Larry Parmelee)
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY
Lines: 62

In article <4857@hubcap.clemson.edu> hubcap@hubcap.clemson.edu (Mike Marshall) writes:
> In order to eschew obfuscation, let me say that this --.
>                                      __________________|
>                                     V
> Muucp,  P=/usr/bin/uux, F=sDFhuU, S=11, R=12, M=100000,
> 
> is the ruleset I want to talk about.
> 
> How would you rewrite something that looked like
>   user@place.edu      or even    user%oneplace.edu@anotherplace.edu

My configuration file does thusly:  We consider our site primarily
an Internet site; Mailer == UUCP implies this message is going into
the UUCP network, so I want very much to rewrite *all* addresses
to avoid "@" signs, so the addresses have a chance of working at
whatever uucp site the mail eventually arrives at, regardless of how
primative.  My "S" and "R" rulesets are basically identical.

user@place.edu =>	cornell!place.edu!user

user%oneplace.edu@anotherplace.edu =>	
	cornell!anotherplace.edu!user%oneplace.edu	

(Priority of "%" is not officially defined anywhere that I know
of, so I give it lowest priority, and assume the rest of the
world does too)

Route-address form:

@relay.cs.net:user@fubar.csnet =>
	cornell!relay.cs.net!fubar.csnet!user

@src-nic.arpa,@relay.cs.net:user@fubar.csnet =>
	cornell!src-nic.arpa!relay.cs.net!fubar.csnet!user

Here's a tricky one:

@relay.cs.net:user@fubar =>
	cornell!relay.cs.net!fubar.!user
Note the dot----------------------^

Dots don't occur in uucp host names, so the presense of a 
dot indicates that the name is to be interpreted as an internet
name.  The dots must be added so that the above can be properly
translated back into internet form.

One point to note:  Whatever you do, ruleset 3 has to be able to
invert the transformation.

Inverse translations in ruleset 3:
relay.cs.net!fubar.!user =>
	@relay.cs.net:user@fubar

Note the difference with this one, where the dot after "fubar" is
omitted:
relay.cs.net!fubar!user =>
	fubar!user@relay.cs.net

I belive the above is fully consistant with RFC 976.
-Larry Parmelee
parmelee@wayback.cs.cornell.edu