khiem@hpindda.cup.hp.COM (Khiem Ho) (10/07/90)
There was some discussion a while back about the ORAddress in string form. Various systems now use the convention "/attribute=value". We have encountered some problem with using the "/" in ORAddress with UUCP (Honeyman-D????). Have anyone encountered other problems with slash in ORAddress with UUCP? Thanks, Khiem Ho Hewlett-Packard
enag@ifi.uio.no (Erik Naggum) (10/07/90)
In article <47920012@hpindda.cup.hp.com> khiem@hpindda.cup.hp.COM (Khiem Ho) writes:
There was some discussion a while back about the ORAddress in
string form. Various systems now use the convention "/attribute=value".
We have encountered some problem with using the "/" in ORAddress
with UUCP (Honeyman-D????). Have anyone encountered other problems with
slash in ORAddress with UUCP?
What an anachronism! Is this because you try to use that infernal
ORaddress syntax in some kind of UUCP<->Internet<->X.400 gateway
thing? "X.400 croaked for want of a slash." :-D
If you run UUCP <-> X.400 gateways, why not send the binary image to
some special program on the other side which understands the X.400
message? No need to resort to the RFC 1138/48 (whatever) or RFC 987
mapping. UUCP is supposed to be 8-bit clean, anyhow.
Oh, well, if someone takes this seriously and does it, let me know.
Another solution is perhaps to write out some batch smtp stuff and
mail it off to a b-smtp program which can decode that envelope. Or
invent something new.
Whatever. But please, please, don't consider the character set legal
on an rmail command line (UUCP "envelope") as important enough to
think seriously about. It may not go away, but there are better ways
around that problem than to restrict the character set of ORaddresses.
Believe me, I know all about those restrictions.
--
[Erik Naggum] Naggum Software; Gaustadalleen 21; 0371 OSLO; NORWAY
I disclaim, <erik@naggum.uu.no>, <enag@ifi.uio.no>
therefore I post. +47-295-8622, +47-256-7822, (fax) +47-260-4427