edward@ukecc.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) (09/02/85)
First, consider this mail header...
>From cbosgd!ihnp4!uwmcsd1!jgd Sun Sep 1 20:49:33 1985 remote from ukma
Received: by ukma.UUCP (4.12/4.7)
id AA02175; Sun, 1 Sep 85 20:49:33 edt
Received: by ihnp4.ATT.UUCP id AA18573; 1 Sep 85 17:39:21 CDT (Sun)
Received: by uwmcsd1.UUCP; id AA28970; Sun, 1 Sep 85 17:08:17 cdt
Date: Sun, 1 Sep 85 17:08:17 cdt
-> From: John G Dobnick <ukma!ihnp4!uwmcsd1!jgd>
Message-Id: <8509012208.AA28970@uwmcsd1.UUCP>
-> To: ihnp4!cbosgd!ukma!ukecc!edward
Notice the two marked lines. The first one is missing 'cbosgd'.
This causes problems because that is the line that mailx picks for
the return address.
What caused this elimination? Which machine out of the five
involved probably did it? Most importantly, can it be fixed?
--
Edward C. Bennett
UUCP: ihnp4!cbosgd!ukma!ukecc!edward
/* A charter member of the Scooter bunch */lauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein) (09/03/85)
The problem noted has been occurring with ihnp4 for quite sometime. The issues are actually quite interesting. Site ihnp4 apparently tries to rebuild the From: (and at least sometimes also the To:) line(s) based on the information already on those lines. Unfortunately, this munging often has undesirable results, since it only results in the correct munging if all previous sites have ALSO munged the From: line as the message passed from point to point, and only if ALL munging was done "correctly" at all points. If munging is to be done at all, it should be based on From_ info, NOT From: info. The From_ info can generally be relied upon to include all uucp sites along the path, while the From: path may not. Note, however, that in many cases (and this situation will become more and more common) the correct thing to do is NOT to munge the From: line AT ALL. Especially when the line is already in @-domain form, it should be left alone and NEVER munged. In fact, my own opinion is that munging of ANY From: lines (whether or not an @-domain address is present on them) is a very bad idea. The From: lines should be left alone except possibly when passing through the ad-hoc ARPANET gateways we have now. If munging is going to be done at such a gateway, it should use the From_ info for parsing. As domain addressing becomes more universally usable, even gateway munging of From: lines will become undesirable. In general then, munging of From: lines is an ad-hoc thing that some sites attempt to do now but that they often get wrong. You cannot rely on every site munging the From: line at all, or doing it in a "reasonable" way when they do munge. Best to leave the From: line (and other 822 lines) alone and generally not munge. From: lines can be used for replies in a domainized environment, or the From_ info can be used for replies in the current ad-hoc situation. --Lauren--
hokey@plus5.UUCP (Hokey) (09/04/85)
There is no problem. It would seem that cbosgd properly left the From: line alone. If your mailer uses the From: line over the >From line, it should also be smart enough to use a router, as the From: line is only supposed to have at *least* an address; it is *not* guaranteed to have a route. -- Hokey ..ihnp4!plus5!hokey 314-725-9492
jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) (09/05/85)
> The problem noted has been occurring with ihnp4 for quite sometime.
I am confused by this explanation... it appears the message's path was
uwmcsd1->ihnp4->cbosgd->ukma->ukecc
But what appears to have been missing was the plain From_ line for cbosgd,
since the program that generated the From: line didn't know the message
passed through cbosgd. Yet, cbosgd appears in the From_ line which ukma
generated. In either case, this would have happened after it passed
through ihnp4, wouldn't it? Or did ihnp4 assume it knew the return path
that "should" be used, and generated the From: line from that?
--
Shyy-Anzr: J. Eric Roskos
UUCP: ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jer
US Mail: MS 795; Perkin-Elmer SDC;
2486 Sand Lake Road, Orlando, FL 32809-7642
Uryc! Gurl'er cnvagvat zl bssvpr oyhr! Jung n qrcerffvat pbybe...gjm@ihnp4.UUCP (Gary J. Murakami) (09/07/85)
> > The problem noted has been occurring with ihnp4 for quite sometime. ... > passed through cbosgd. Yet, cbosgd appears in the From_ line which ukma > generated. In either case, this would have happened after it passed > through ihnp4, wouldn't it? Or did ihnp4 assume it knew the return path > that "should" be used, and generated the From: line from that? My philosophy is to minimize header munging. As far as I know, ihnp4 leaves the From: line alone, but I could be mistaken, especially since I am tired of sendmail config files. However it has been my experience that the problems have (almost) always been elsewhere. -Gary