Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!indri!unmvax!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!sgi!vjs@rhyolite.SGI.COM
From: vjs@rhyolite.SGI.COM (Vernon Schryver)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: sendmail parsing questions - my comments
Summary: what about lots of !'s?
Message-ID: <32716@sgi.SGI.COM>
Date: 13 May 89 02:39:28 GMT
References: <1635@ur-cc.UUCP> <53257@uunet.UU.NET>  <89May11.183003edt.11589@neat.ai.toronto.edu>
Sender: daemon@sgi.SGI.COM
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA
Lines: 24

In article <89May11.183003edt.11589@neat.ai.toronto.edu>, rayan@ai.toronto.edu (Rayan Zachariassen) writes:
> ....  If the
> %@ proposal goes through, it would be an opportunity for all the gateways
> to do it right:
> 
> 	a!b!c -> c%b@a.dom
> 	a::"b!c" -> c%b@a.dom
> 	a!@b:c@d -> !@#$&*@(^%
> 
> no more mixed-syntax addresses, please...

What should be done done with a!b!c!d!e ?  More than one % ?  Keep some of
the !'s ?  Bounce it if the next hop, 'a', cannot be reached by UUCP, even
though we are of course assuming it is a valid, registered, approved domain
(or has such an synonym according to the maps)?  I've seen more than a
couple of such relatively benign things pass both ways through SGI's
gateway.

I'm just asking for the revealed wisdom of the coming RFC and what the
big gateways will do, and not intending to attack anybody or anything.

Vernon Schryver
Silicon Graphics
vjs@sgi.com