Xref: utzoo comp.mail.uucp:1686 news.software.b:1572 Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!bloom-beacon!oberon!skat.usc.edu!blarson From: blarson@skat.usc.edu (Bob Larson) Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,news.software.b Subject: Re: using Path: for mail replies Message-ID: <11751@oberon.USC.EDU> Date: 22 Aug 88 07:43:57 GMT References: <676@bacchus.dec.com> <881@vsi1.uucp> <10135@e.ms.uky.edu> <60@minya.uucp> <8528@swan.ulowell.edu> <879@ncrcan.toronto.ncr.com> <63@volition.dec.com>Sender: news@oberon.USC.EDU Reply-To: blarson@skat.usc.edu (Bob Larson) Followup-To: news.software.b Organization: USC AIS, Los Angeles Lines: 20 [note redirected followups, this is straying from a mail issue to a news one.] In article eric@snark.UUCP (Eric S. Raymond) writes: >I understand the problem you've been discussing, but I have rejected (for now) >the idea of eliminating Path lines as available for reply generation. How about at least defining a standard way to indicate the path is not a valid mail address? (This should be true on moderated newsgroups and articles recieved via recmail.) Would any software break (other than the already broken software that assumes path is a valid mail address) if the string following the last ! was null? (Moderaters who try to ensure the path line contains a uucp mail path to the poster prevent the article going to those sites mentioned.) -- Bob Larson Arpa: Blarson@Ecla.Usc.Edu blarson@skat.usc.edu Uucp: {sdcrdcf,cit-vax}!oberon!skat!blarson Prime mailing list: info-prime-request%ais1@ecla.usc.edu oberon!ais1!info-prime-request