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