jko@homer.UUCP (Jonathan O'Neal) (06/19/91)
Greetings, netlanders, and especially you mail/MMDF gurus out there.
We have MMDF running under SCO Unix SV3.2.2, and it's giving me a headache.
No, not the usual one - I invested the hours and actually understand the
ins and outs of the channels, domains, and the tailor file. What I can't
seem to do is this: send a message to a friend with a "weird" but valid
address.
The address in question looks like this:
"1234::username"@site.site.site
If I quote the quotes so C-shell doesn't eat them, the address gets
inserted correctly into the message itself, but the rmail command in
the outgoing UUCP command file says "rmail site.site.site!1234!!username".
Someone downstream doesn't like the "!!" and these messages get rejected
every time. If I edit the /usr/spool/uucp/site/D.site### file (before it
goes out) so the rmail command says "site.site.site!1234::username", the
message gets transmitted successfully.
QUESTION: Is there some simpler way to do this? I assume the UUCP
channel program is massaging the address (even though it's in quotes),
but I can't figure out how to tell it not to. And racing to the
/usr/spool/uucp/site directory after each message is getting old... ;-)
Please post your reply here, as I cannot yet receive mail from the
outside world (duplicate domain name problem, registration pending).
Thanks in advance.
-jkodavid@sco.COM (David Fiander) (06/20/91)
According to jko@homer.UUCP (Jonathan O'Neal) (in <1991Jun19.145124.6550@homer.UUCP>): > > Greetings, netlanders, and especially you mail/MMDF gurus out there. >We have MMDF running under SCO Unix SV3.2.2, and it's giving me a headache. >No, not the usual one - I invested the hours and actually understand the >ins and outs of the channels, domains, and the tailor file. What I can't Congratulations! >seem to do is this: send a message to a friend with a "weird" but valid >address. > > The address in question looks like this: > "1234::username"@site.site.site Ahah! A decnet address. They are probably much more common that micnet addresses. > If I quote the quotes so C-shell doesn't eat them, the address gets >inserted correctly into the message itself, but the rmail command in >the outgoing UUCP command file says "rmail site.site.site!1234!!username". >Someone downstream doesn't like the "!!" and these messages get rejected >every time. If I edit the /usr/spool/uucp/site/D.site### file (before it >goes out) so the rmail command says "site.site.site!1234::username", the >message gets transmitted successfully. Good. > > QUESTION: Is there some simpler way to do this? I assume the UUCP >channel program is massaging the address (even though it's in quotes), >but I can't figure out how to tell it not to. And racing to the >/usr/spool/uucp/site directory after each message is getting old... ;-) The good news is that it's _not_ the uucp channel. Core MMDF is not doing anything abnormal to your address at all. The problem is in one of mailx or execmail. ":" is the separator in micnet addresses, and somebody in the distant past of SCO MMDF added code to one of these two programs (which are a "User agent", as opposed to MMDF, which is a "Mail Transfer Agent") to "correctly" rewrite colons to bangs so that MMDF could better deal with them. The problem is that the got a little gung-ho, and rewrite the colons even in non-local addresses. This "gung-ho-ity" has been added to the (now short) list of bugs which need to be fixed. The immediate answer to your problem is to switch to ELM (ouch) or MH (ooch), or some other User agent which does not use execmail. (I hate having to say to switch away from the stuff we sold). -- David J. Fiander SCO MMDF Development Team SCO Canada, Inc.
fitz@wang.com (Tom Fitzgerald) (06/25/91)
> According to jko@homer.UUCP (Jonathan O'Neal) [ :: is getting rewritten to !! in outgoing mail ] >> QUESTION: Is there some simpler way to do this? I assume the UUCP >> channel program is massaging the address (even though it's in quotes), >> but I can't figure out how to tell it not to. And racing to the >> /usr/spool/uucp/site directory after each message is getting old... ;-) david@sco.COM (David Fiander) writes: > The immediate answer to your problem is to switch to ELM (ouch) > or MH (ooch), or some other User agent which does not use > execmail. (I hate having to say to switch away from the stuff > we sold). It can't just be execmail, because we've seen the same thing happen with mail that was just being relayed through here, without ever coming in contact with a user interface. Mail arriving here had "::" in it, mail arriving at our neighbor had "!!" instead. --- Tom Fitzgerald Wang Labs fitz@wang.com 1-508-967-5278 Lowell MA, USA ...!uunet!wang!fitz
jko@homer.UUCP (Jonathan O'Neal) (06/26/91)
In <b7jttw.yg@wang.com> fitz@wang.com (Tom Fitzgerald) writes: >> According to jko@homer.UUCP (Jonathan O'Neal) >[ :: is getting rewritten to !! in outgoing mail ] >david@sco.COM (David Fiander) writes: >[ switch from mail/execmail to ELM or MH ] >It can't just be execmail, because we've seen the same thing happen with >mail that was just being relayed through here, without ever coming in >contact with a user interface. Mail arriving here had "::" in it, mail >arriving at our neighbor had "!!" instead. Hmm. I can't comment on that, but I followed David's advice, got ELM, and now my addresses go untouched. Actually, ELM seems to use a different addressing scheme: Elm: Jonathan O'Neal <1234::foo@site.site> mail/execmail: 1234::foo@site.site (Jonathan O'Neal) I assume that both are correct within RFC822(?) guidelines, since both seem to work. Anyway, Elm solved the problem (Thanks, David!). >--- >Tom Fitzgerald Wang Labs fitz@wang.com >1-508-967-5278 Lowell MA, USA ...!uunet!wang!fitz -jko -- (.sig and witty quote removed due to bad mail address)
david@golem.uucp (David J. Fiander) (06/28/91)
This is David J. Fiander again. I'm not at work this time, 'though. In article <1991Jun26.114204.3505@homer.UUCP> jko@homer.UUCP (Jonathan O'Neal) writes: >In <b7jttw.yg@wang.com> fitz@wang.com (Tom Fitzgerald) writes: > >>> According to jko@homer.UUCP (Jonathan O'Neal) >>[ :: is getting rewritten to !! in outgoing mail ] > >>david@sco.COM (David Fiander) writes: >>[ switch from mail/execmail to ELM or MH ] > >>It can't just be execmail, because we've seen the same thing happen with >>mail that was just being relayed through here, without ever coming in >>contact with a user interface. Mail arriving here had "::" in it, mail >>arriving at our neighbor had "!!" instead. > That's strange, I don't see that behaviour. > Hmm. I can't comment on that, but I followed David's advice, got ELM, >and now my addresses go untouched. Actually, ELM seems to use a different Glad to hear that I'm not alone in this. >addressing scheme: > >Elm: Jonathan O'Neal <1234::foo@site.site> >mail/execmail: 1234::foo@site.site (Jonathan O'Neal) > >I assume that both are correct within RFC822(?) guidelines, since both seem >to work. Anyway, Elm solved the problem (Thanks, David!). Yup. Elm is using the syntax "Phrase <who@where>", and mail is using the syntax "who@where (comment)". These are the two most common types of addresses. - David