Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!peltz
From: peltz@cerl.uiuc.edu (Steve Peltz)
Newsgroups: news.newusers.questions
Subject: Re: UUCP Addresses
Message-ID: <1990Feb3.081741.23991@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 3 Feb 90 08:17:41 GMT
References: <7419@tank.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (News)
Organization: UIUC Computer-based Education Research Lab
Lines: 27

In article <7419@tank.uchicago.edu> jill@tank.uchicago.edu (jill holly hansen) writes:
>I understand that the UUCP extension on addresses is obsolete. For
>example, I can't respond to a posting from someone such as
>xxx@whatever.UUCP without changing it to xxx@whatever.UU.net.
>
>My question is simply, why do we continue to get UUCP extensions?  Is
>it the "whatever" machine's fault, or should my machine's copy of
>inews or rn, etc. be able to change UUCP to something proper?

My (somewhat limited) understanding is that your mailer, or the mailer that
your mailer defaults to when it doesn't know the host you're sending to,
should rewrite that address to be whatever!xxx@smart.host, where smart.host
is some machine that DOES keep UUCP maps and can figure out where to send it
on from there.

All that .UUCP should mean is that the machine is not (yet) registered with
a full domain name, and that it IS registered with the UUCP project. If there
is a domain name, it ought to be using that instead of .UUCP, and if it isn't
registered as a UUCP host, no one knows how to get to it (though you could
probably figure out a route by looking at the return path that an article
took to get to you).

Wouldn't it be nice if you could say a magic word and everyone's mailers would
instantly become compatible?
--
Steve Peltz (almost) CFI-G    Just say "NO" to drug testing.
---"Monticello traffic, Glider 949 landing 18, full stop"---