From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/9759 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Sudish Joseph Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Good Netkeeping Seal of Approval (GNKSA) Date: 31 Jan 1997 19:43:27 -0500 Sender: sj@atreides.mindspring.com Message-ID: References: <90lu3nzjl8u.fsf@opus.online.no> <0f915bxkwz.fsf@fraxinus.daimi.aau.dk> <0fzpxpfrsi.fsf@fraxinus.daimi.aau.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.100) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035149731 20325 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 21:35:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:35:31 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA05879 for ; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 17:03:29 -0800 Original-Received: from atreides.mindspring.com (atreides.mindspring.com [204.180.142.236]) by ifi.uio.no with SMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Sat, 1 Feb 1997 01:43:33 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 17696 invoked by uid 52477); 1 Feb 1997 00:43:27 -0000 Original-To: The Ding List In-Reply-To: Rich Pieri's message of 31 Jan 1997 18:44:51 -0500 Original-Lines: 73 X-Mailer: Red Gnus v0.82/XEmacs 20.0 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:9759 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:9759 Rich Pieri writes: > No, you should be able to type "foo@zub.fi". To get at the "local" fi > subdomain you should be typing the full host name, which is required for > *ALL* Internet mail, even if zub.fi.cs.cmu.edu is literally right next > to the one you are sending from. Local names should only be used > locally, that is, on the same machine (and really then only if the > machine is not on any network). No. 822 explicitly allows compression of domain names--which is quite funny, coz it has no relevance to what happens between co-operating hosts. Like that other pastime, they can do whatever it is that tickles the parts they like tickled. Here's the ref in the interests of stillborn speculation, -Sudish [ RFC 822, I snipped a page divider ] 6.2.2. ABBREVIATED DOMAIN SPECIFICATION Since any number of levels is possible within the domain hierarchy, specification of a fully qualified address can become inconvenient. This standard permits abbreviated domain specification, in a special case: For the address of the sender, call the left-most sub-domain Level N. In a header address, if all of the sub-domains above (i.e., to the right of) Level N are the same as those of the sender, then they do not have to appear in the specification. Otherwise, the address must be fully qualified. This feature is subject to approval by local sub- domains. Individual sub-domains may require their member systems, which originate mail, to provide full domain specification only. When permitted, abbrevia- tions may be present only while the message stays within the sub-domain of the sender. Use of this mechanism requires the sender's sub-domain to reserve the names of all top-level domains, so that full specifications can be distinguished from abbrevi- ated specifications. For example, if a sender's address is: sender@registry-A.registry-1.organization-X and one recipient's address is: recipient@registry-B.registry-1.organization-X and another's is: recipient@registry-C.registry-2.organization-X then ".registry-1.organization-X" need not be specified in the the message, but "registry-C.registry-2" DOES have to be specified. That is, the first two addresses may be abbrevi- ated, but the third address must be fully specified. When a message crosses a domain boundary, all addresses must be specified in the full format, ending with the top-level name-domain in the right-most field. It is the responsibility of mail forwarding services to ensure that addresses conform with this requirement. In the case of abbreviated addresses, the relaying service must make the necessary expansions. It should be noted that it often is difficult for such a service to locate all occurrences of address abbreviations. For exam- ple, it will not be possible to find such abbreviations within the body of the message. The "Return-Path" field can aid recipients in recovering from these errors.