HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Mixed format addresses
Date: 15 Dec 92 21:06:33 GMT
Article-I.D.: gaia.1glhcpINNkgt
Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography
NNTP-Posting-Host: skyking.oce.orst.edu

In article <BzBBMJ.4xp.2@cs.cmu.edu> Karl_Kleinpaste@cs.cmu.edu writes:
>stanley@skyking.oce.orst.edu writes:
>   >Then my boss isn't really in charge of the machines at my site, because he
>   >has to go through one of the sysadmins to make a configuration change?

No, I certainly did not write this.

>Your attitude is insulting to the many sysadmins out there who
>voluntarily support domains requiring MX support. 

My "attitude" is that those people who voluntarily provide support by 
providing MX records do not automatically come under my control just
because they are providing an MX record for me. Period. 

Since they are not under my control, I am not "in charge" of them, in
the same sense that the "boss" referred to by the true author of the
above quote is.  If they have two things to do late Friday afternoon,
and one of them isn't making a change in my DNS information, I am in no
position to demand that the one thing they have time to do will be
mine.

>Anyone who ran such a domain and needed updates simply mailed me the
>update, and I didn't do anything more than check it quickly for
>outright errors so my nameservers wouldn't choke on it.  Installation
>of the updates was usually done within the day.

Did you consider yourself to be under the control of the sites who
connected to you? Were THEY in charge of your nameserver, or were you?
Consider what you did with changes that had errors -- did you make them
or did you refuse? And when you refused, were any of your sites able to
overturn your refusal? Then they weren't in charge, were they?

>It is singularly inappropriate for you to be accusing others of taking
>the low road of personal insult when you are quite possibly doing more
>of the same, obtusely and without direct reference, than the rest of
>the participants in this pointless argument combined.

I have accused no admin of any wrongdoing. Show me where I have. Don't
tell me about what you inferred or thought I said -- tell me where I
said it. 

>Yes, when you are the domain contact of an MX-supported domain, you
>_are_ in charge of the zone file for your domain, 

I am not the domain contact, thus not in charge. I doubt that I am the
only site like this. If I am unable to force a change to the zone file,
then I certainly am not in charge of that file.

>and the sysadmin who
>actually manages the nameservers that support your domain has a quite
>obvious and clear responsibility to be responsive to your needs for
>updates.  

In my case, yes, because I pay for him to do it. In the case of
Random.uucp who gets a free connection from Arbitrary.edu, the "obvious
and clear responsibility" is not so obvious and clear. It becomes even
less so when the feed is arbitrary.com.

>If you're going to be insulting, 

Conditional clause not fulfilled, remainder of paragraph deleted.
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
From: Jim Shirreffs
Subject: Re: Mixed format addresses
Organization: JJ Software 
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 20:53:08 GMT


I didn't really didn't follow that discussion but it sounds like you are the right
people to tell me how to set my home Unix system mail routining (UUCP).
I'm running SVR4. Right now I just make and entry into my System file to get
mail access to that system. I know this is not the right way to do things.
What is? 

Thanks in advance.

jim shirreffs (I wish I knew more)
Xref: sparky comp.mail.misc:3987 mi.sun:69 mi.misc:787
From: ken@wybbs.mi.org (Ken Jongsma)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,mi.sun,mi.misc
Subject: Re: Email trivia
Date: 15 Dec 92 14:12:04 GMT
Reply-To: jongsma@benzie.si.com
Organization: Smiths Industries

scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons) writes:

>From: Electronic Postmaster <POSTMASTER@CompuServe.COM>
>To: <scs@wotan.iti.org>
>Subject: Undeliverable message

>Re: ? EMDRPD - Mail Delivery Failure. Refused -- Postage Due.
>  >EPX [XXXXX,XXXX] December SEMiSLUG -- The New Sun Stuff

>Your message could not be delivered as addressed.

>--- Returned message ---

>XXXXX,XXXX was the Compuserve account.  Seems like a pretty reasonable
>way of dealing with folks who don't pay their bills -- return the mail
>to sender.  I approve.

Well, that's not exactly what it means. Or maybe it means more than one
thing. Compu$erve has two plans for billing. One is a pay for the time
you are on line reading mail. The other is a pay per message received
plan. If you are on the pay per message plan, you have the option of
returning a message unread to avoid paying for it. That generates the
postage due message.

-- 
Ken Jongsma                                     jongsma@benzie.si.com
Smiths Industries                                    ken@wybbs.mi.org 
Grand Rapids, Michigan                      73115.1041@compuserve.com 
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
From: Thomas.Enblom@eos.ericsson.se (Thomas Enblom)
Subject: e-mail to databases
Reply-To: Thomas.Enblom@eos.ericsson.se
Organization: Ericsson Telecom AB
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 16:13:29 GMT

I'm relatively new reader to this newsgroup. Since I don't have the
possibility to use anonymous ftp I wonder if someone has a list
of databases that can be reached through e-mail.

I suppose there exist an FAQ or something alike that covers my question.

Any help would be appreciated.




================================================================================
Ericsson Telecom, Stockholm, Sweden
      
Thomas Enblom, just another employee.     
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,comp.mail.uucp
From: wb8foz@skybridge.SCL.CWRU.Edu (David Lesher)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Mixed format addresses
Date: 15 Dec 92 01:41:46 GMT
Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex
NNTP-Posting-Host: skybridge.scl.cwru.edu


 John Stanley said:
# Neither of these puts me in charge of my little section of the DNS. They
# put me in contact with someone else, who is in charge of my little
# section. Not the same thing.

 >Or even having an account on your DNS server's
 >machine so you can make the updates yourself.  

# Oh boy, an account where I can access system files and make changes.
{}
# And the first place they will see it is in their
# DNS records when UUCP-user forgets to update the serial number or puts a
# goofy date in the file. Or when two UUCP-users try to update the same
# file at the same time.

Mr. Stanley appears to want the ability to make changes on his
own, without any responsibility for the problems he would cause
when he screws things up.

Mr. Stanley, sir. There is only ONE way to get a such a
powerful, unaccountable role in the United States.

Get off the net, and run for public office.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast..wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu
& no one will talk to a host that's close..........................
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
Xref: sparky comp.mail.misc:3973 comp.mail.uucp:2317
From: dawson@willard.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Mixed format addresses
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 13:05:37 EST
Organization: Willard's House BBS, Atlanta, GA -- +1 (404) 664 8814

ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis) writes:

> Willard, for one, appears to be insisting that Internet sites keep
> up-to-date pathalias maps around so they can route to .UUCP sites.  And his
> posts have sounded a bit whiny to me.

Oh, really.  Please send me email, and elaborate.  I'd just love to know
how I can redeem myself.


-- 
dawson@willard.UUCP (Willard Dawson)
gatech!vdbsan!willard!dawson
emory!uumind!willard!dawson
Willard's House BBS, Atlanta, GA -- +1 (404) 664 8814
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
From: sstern@jmb2.jmb.com (Steven D. Stern)
Subject: Re: Sprint Mail
Organization: JMB Realty Corporation
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Distribution: comp.mail.misc
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 15:50:16 GMT

Thank you.  I'm now able to use name@sprint.sprint.com as well
as the X.400 format.  My problem was that elm's aliasing facility
was trashing the X.400 address!

--
 +-------------------------+---------------------------------+ 
 | Steven Stern            | "Bones, quick, over here!"      |
 | sstern@jmb2.jmb.com     | "He's dead, Jim."               |
 | 70327.135@compuserve.com|                                 |
 +-------------------------+---------------------------------+
From: mharriso@digi.lonestar.org (Mark Harrison)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: mailing list software... FAQ?
Date: 18 Dec 92 15:46:59 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

I looked for this in the FAQ, but didn't see anything.  Can anyone
recommend a simple mailing list package?

Thanks in advance,
Mark.
-- 
Mark Harrison, mharriso@dsccc.com
From: devadoss@delphi.pilgrim.umass.edu (John deVadoss)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: Parsing Unix messages in /usr/spool/mail.
Date: 12 Dec 92 01:40:09 GMT
Reply-To: devadoss@cs.umass.edu


Hi I am looking for some information regarding parsing the
mail messages in the /usr/spool/mail/ directory say.

I would like to know whether there is a BNF representation or
something to that effect. Thank you.

john.
Xref: sparky comp.mail.misc:3980 comp.mail.uucp:2323
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Mixed format addresses
Date: 15 Dec 92 03:42:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: gaia.1gjk6oINN9po
Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography
NNTP-Posting-Host: skyking.oce.orst.edu

In article <1gjd4qINNer3@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher) writes:
>Mr. Stanley appears to want the ability to make changes on his
>own, without any responsibility for the problems he would cause
>when he screws things up.

Would you care to show me where I have said I wanted such ability? 

>Mr. Stanley, sir. There is only ONE way to get a such a
>powerful, unaccountable role in the United States.
>
>Get off the net, and run for public office.

Thank you so much for your constructive commentary. You won't mind
terribly if I ignore what you say, since you have obviously been
ignoring what I have been saying?
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
From: bruce@blilly.UUCP (Bruce Lilly)
Subject: Re: e-mail headers
Organization: Bruce Lilly
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 92 22:57:56 GMT
Reply-To: lilb@sony.compuserve.com (Bruce Lilly)

In article <BzGwuK.AFD.2@cs.cmu.edu> Karl_Kleinpaste@cs.cmu.edu wrote:
>
>You can ftp to nic.ddn.mil and look in the "rfc" directory, where you
>should pick up RFC822, which is the overall reference for Internet-
>compliant mail.

And RFC1123, which amends RFC822.

-- 
	Bruce Lilly		blilly!bruce@Broadcast.Sony.COM
					...uunet!sonyusa!sonyd1!blilly!bruce
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
From: jbutt@garfield.cs.mun.ca (Jonathan Butt)
Subject: Re: Santa?
Organization: CS Dept., Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 19:13:35 GMT

bbirch@hemel.bull.co.uk (Bill Birch) writes:

>A collegue gave me Santa Claus's email address as follows:

> 
>> 
>> S.Claus@arctic.circle.np 

>However the mailer daemon cannot deliver to this address. Can
>anyone shed some light on this problem please?

>Ta

Yes, since the North Pole is inside Canada, you would very likely have to change the address to S.Claus@arctic.circle.np.ca

Or you can write him @
Santa Claus
North Pole
Canada
H0H 0H0


(If you snail mail to this address he will send a reply. At least in Canada he will send a reply.)

Check out the postal code H0H 0H0 

Happy Holidays :-)

-- 
Jonathan D. Butt (aka. Slammer)
jbutt@garfield.cs.mun.ca
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,comp.mail.uucp
From: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Mixed format addresses
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 21:27:05 GMT

In article <BzBBMJ.4xp.2@cs.cmu.edu> Karl_Kleinpaste@cs.cmu.edu writes:
>Your attitude is insulting to the many sysadmins out there who
>voluntarily support domains requiring MX support.

You may indeed be a very nice person, but I don't see why that should
make everyone want to be forced to rely on the kindness of strangers.

>I used to have an
>open offer to provide nameservice and MX connectivity to absolutely
>any entity anywhere, when I was [ph]ostmaster@cis.ohio-state.edu.

I trust some other kind stranger has taken over the task...

Les Mikesell
  les@chinet.chi.il.us
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Mixed format addresses
Date: 14 Dec 92 04:48:55 GMT
Article-I.D.: gaia.1gh3nnINNk1c
Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography
NNTP-Posting-Host: skyking.oce.orst.edu

In article <-ng1H!zgcb@atlantis.psu.edu> barr@pop.psu.edu (David Barr) writes:
>In article <1gg7eeINNfve@gaia.ucs.orst.edu> stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley) writes:
>>I can be in charge of my "little section" of the DNS?

>Yes.

>>Just what protocol do YOU know of that will allow a UUCP site to change the
>>DNS records for its MX site? 

>mail hostmaster@my.mx.dom.ain

And if hostmaster is on vacation? If he doesn't feel like doing it this
week? 

Mail is hardly "being in charge" of anything.

>And guess what, if you were to update your UUCP map entry, you'd have to
>do something similar anyway.

So? I haven't claimed otherwise. All I am trying to do is counter the
silly claim that anyone can be in charge of their part of the DNS.
From: endter@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (Bill Endter RCS)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: Mail to/from PRODIGY?
Date: 17 Dec 92 23:37:27 GMT
Organization: Nasa Ames Res. Ctr. Mtn Vw CA 94035


   I recently read that Prodigy is now connected to the Internet.  Is it 
possible to send and receive mail from a user on Prodigy via the internet?
If it is possible, what does the mail address look like?

		Thanks,

		Bill
Xref: sparky comp.mail.misc:3989 comp.mail.uucp:2330
From: Karl_Kleinpaste@cs.cmu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Mixed format addresses
Date: 15 Dec 92 17:59:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.BzBBMJ.4xp.2
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon Univ, Nectar Project

stanley@skyking.oce.orst.edu writes:
   >Then my boss isn't really in charge of the machines at my site, because he
   >has to go through one of the sysadmins to make a configuration change?

   There is a bit of a difference between your boss, who is in charge of
   the system admins who make the changes, and me, who is in charge of
   nobody at the site who maintains my DNS records. Unless you think that
   having someone keep an MX record for you somehow makes you in charge of
   the person doing it.

Your attitude is insulting to the many sysadmins out there who
voluntarily support domains requiring MX support.  I used to have an
open offer to provide nameservice and MX connectivity to absolutely
any entity anywhere, when I was [ph]ostmaster@cis.ohio-state.edu.
Anyone who ran such a domain and needed updates simply mailed me the
update, and I didn't do anything more than check it quickly for
outright errors so my nameservers wouldn't choke on it.  Installation
of the updates was usually done within the day.

It is singularly inappropriate for you to be accusing others of taking
the low road of personal insult when you are quite possibly doing more
of the same, obtusely and without direct reference, than the rest of
the participants in this pointless argument combined.

Yes, when you are the domain contact of an MX-supported domain, you
_are_ in charge of the zone file for your domain, and the sysadmin who
actually manages the nameservers that support your domain has a quite
obvious and clear responsibility to be responsive to your needs for
updates.  If they weren't prepared for that responsibility, they
wouldn't have offered to be provide nameservice.

If you're going to be insulting, you could at least have the common
decency to provide counterexamples, situations where nameserver admins
have deliberately, or even unknowingly, made life difficult for
MX-supported domains by _not_ being responsive to such needs.

--karl,
at one time, technical and zone
contact for some 40 domains, most
of which I registered myself
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
From: schan@andy.bgsu.edu (Steve)
Subject: Help in Eudora
Followup-To: comp.mail.misc
Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh.
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 18:40:00 GMT

Hey! Guys. I am using Eudora at BGSU through the University backbond, but I
want to use the software in the modem also.  My friend just download a
Toolbox image file from Apple com. site for me.  What I suppose to do is to
install all the scripts into the system and the software should works. 
But, it doesn't!

There is one file named "installCTB11".  This should be the program which I
can double click and then everything will be done for me like magic.  But
it doesn't work that well.  So if somebody out there knows how to get the
Eudora works in the modem.  Please reply my message at schan@andy.bgsu.edu.
 I will very much appreciate your help.  So, plea....se!

Ooh! If you guys knows any public domain communication software which is
user friendly and works better than kermit, please tell me also. Thanx.  

Merry X'mas and happy New Year.
From: DONAHOE@acsnovell1.uta.edu (Sean Donahoe)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: Need help getting from internet to uucp
Date: 18 Dec 1992 10:40:16 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
Reply-To: donahoe@acsnovell1.uta.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


------- Forwarded Message Follows -------

From:       Postmaster@ACSNovell1.uta.edu
To:         DONAHOE@ACSNovell1.uta.edu
Subject:    Rejected Mail
Date:       Fri Dec 18 10:37:24 1992


Unable to deliver message because:

      mail [comp-mail-misc]@cs.utexas.edu : Problems with this Address
      mail@ACSNOVELL1 : Unknown User

Returned Text follows
-------------------
To: mail [comp-mail-misc]@cs.utexas.edu
From:     "Sean Donahoe"  <DONAHOE@acsnovell1.uta.edu>
Date:     18 Dec 92 10:37:16 CST
Subject:  Need to get to a uucp node from internet
Reply-to: donahoe@acsnovell1.uta.edu
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail v2.2 (R3).

    I am trying to send mail from a machine on the internet (DOS-
based PC running Pegasus Mail through a CHARON gateway to internet),
and I need to know how to address the To: line to get to a "uucp
only" xenix-based PC.  I know an internet address to the internet
gateway for their uucp "net", but I can't seem to connect to the
gateway.  I have even tried to send mail to "Postmaster" at the
gateway site, and have had my mail bounce as "undeliverable for 3
days".  None of these sites are in the UUCP maps, but the gateway
machine does have an entry in the nic.ddn.mil whois server. I have
tried to send mail to the addresses listed at nic for this domain,
but all my messages time out as undeliverable after 3 days.  Anyway,
the nodes are connected through uucp dial-ups as shown below, and my
mail is bouncing at the gateway level (coming from outside the uucp
"net" into IA_NGNET.army.mil from acsnovell1.uta.edu).  So my first
question is:

Why won't Postmaster@IA_NGNET.army.mil accept any mail (or anyone
else at IA_NGNET)?

and my second question is:

If I do eventually get through this gateway, how do I send to f20?
Do I have to mix uucp bang paths with internet addresses, do I use !
or % or :: or what to separate the name elements?




__________
|        |<------------This is my mail destination
|  F20   |
----------
    \
     \
      \
    ----------
    |        |
    |  F00   |
    ----------      _______The name of this node isn't handy
        \          /
          \      /
            \   V
              ------------
              |          |
              |   ???    |
              ------------                  ---------------------
                     \                      |                   |
                      \____________________/| IA_NGNET.ARMY.MIL |
                                            ---------------------


Thanks for any help.

Sean


 /~~\ |~\  |~\    |  -A fool and his money are my friends-
 \__  |_/  |  |   | Sean Donahoe donahoe@acsnovell1.uta.edu
 \__) |    |_/    | University of Texas at Arlington
----------------------------------------------------------------------
                     I have no opinions, only facts.
Xref: sparky comp.mail.misc:3950 comp.mail.uucp:2302
From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst)
Subject: Re: Mixed format addresses
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 08:28:34 GMT
Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI

In article <1gh2pdINNj8g@gaia.ucs.orst.edu> stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley) writes:
>Neither of these puts me in charge of my little section of the DNS. They
>put me in contact with someone else, who is in charge of my little
>section. Not the same thing.

And from what you're saying, you don't really want to be in charge of
your own little section of the DNS because it's too much trouble to do
correctly.

So, register in the .US domain, where there are nice people at ISI to
take care of the nitty-gritty details for you.

>> JS> With the DNS, it is easy to poke incorrect data into the database and
>> JS> *poof* EVERYONE is using bogus data. 

With the UUCP maps, it's just as easy to poke the incorrect data into
the database, except once it's in there it becomes a lot more
difficult to remove.  How many sites out there are still using
outdated versions of the maps?

The UUCP maps are a lot less deterministic when it comes to routing.
If I want to make sure that all mail for machine A gets sent through
machine B, where machine A talks to around 15 different sites, I have
to play games with the costs in machine B's map or in the maps of all
the other sites machine A talks to.  And if one of them puts too low
of a cost for machine A in their map, the mail will get misrouted for
the next month.

>Sigh. You must keep something that tells you who a root nameserver is.
>That is, indeed, keeping some information about someone.

Okay, so the root nameservers is "someone".  I still think it's a lot
more reliable and efficient to store 32 bits of information on each of
a dozen machines -- especially when that data changes very rarely --
than it is to store 500 bytes or so of data on each of thousands of
hosts.

>if you wish.  It is still not a reasonable expectation for every UUCP
>site to have an MX record, whether it is its own or part of a
>wildcard.

I disagree.  Registering in the .US domain is no more difficult than
registering in the UUCP maps, and you won't even have to find another
machine to connect to if you're already talking to an
Internet-connected machine who is willing to forward mail for you.  If
you don't feel like doing that you can always pay UUNET or MSEN $35 to
register your domain for you.

-- 
Marc Unangst, N8VRH         | "Of course, in order to understand this you
mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us   |  have to remember that the nucleus of the atom
                            |  is squishy."
                            |    -W. Scheider, from a Physics lecture
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc