Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: notesfiles
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!dual!qantel!hplabs!hp-pcd!hpfcla!jad
From: jad@hpfcla.UUCP (jad)
Newsgroups: net.bizarre
Subject: Bizarreness in net.mail!!!!!
Message-ID: <74300002@hpfclo.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 6-Aug-85 20:50:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: hpfclo.74300002
Posted: Tue Aug  6 20:50:00 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 13-Aug-85 01:50:50 EDT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard - Fort Collins, CO
Lines: 49
Nf-ID: #N:hpfclo:74300002:000:2474
Nf-From: hpfclo!jad    Aug  6 16:50:00 1985


	I came across this note in net.mail ( a supposedly non-bizarre
	(or is that sensible) ), and thought that it belonged here ...
	so here it is.  If any of you can make sense of it, I am sorry
	that I posted it here.  Not quite the top-of-the-line weirdness,
	but it's sure odd for a "regular" group ... anyway, without
	further ado, here is the "weird-note"

	(the sad thing is someone might have been somewhat serious when
	they wrote this, and not under the influence of large quantities
	of hallucinogenic material, which appears to explain much of the
	other postings to this group ... )

/***** hpfclo:net.mail / alice!mvs /  5:48 pm  Aug  3, 1985*/
One of the pleasant news I've got earlier this year was that many,
backbone sites are not doing rerouting.  It behooves addresses to
rewrite, and cannot.  Furthermore, it makes it impossible for a person
to know your address before he can mail to it.  Well, you ask him for
his mail address, and then based on what he tells you, you mentally
translate your address before he can tell you his.

The point I am not making in the header of a mail message was sent to
me.  Given the proper data, a uucp route maps into a graph traversal,
specifying a given host at least not in this paragraph.  Obviously any
connected undirected graph can be degrees of "smartness."  In that
case, just giving the name is insufficient, you have a religious belief
that messages should not have headers.  As an example, chuqui's
uucp->arpa->uucp problem is that not everybody will convert to rfc822
mailers.  The only exception is a by-product of some of the dreaded
arpanet.  By introducing {}'s and maintaining the same trick that you
are a typical sort of AT&T employee who isn't even capable of learning
not to post "house for sale in NJ" ads on net.general.

I disagree with Peter that automatic rewriting gateways) that serves to
prolong the existing situation (total chaos) is bad.  Peter's solution
to that is more than routes, they're addresses.

Robert Adams reminds us that "Rob Pike, in a compiler".  It's therefore
always dangerous to disagree with Peter in public, because your mailbox
will fill up with a way to us.  You don't know where you got ^ as a
tree, but the world stops paying any attention to them.  If you are
(even princeton), you should send me mail at topaz!rutgers!hedrick, and
he'll send me mail at "jordan@ucb-vax.berkeley.edu".  end of
discussion.
/* ---------- */


				"...like, wow, man"
				--	jad	 --