Xref: utzoo comp.mail.uucp:1629 comp.mail.headers:397
Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!peregrine!elroy!ames!husc6!purdue!decwrl!vixie
From: vixie@decwrl.dec.com (Paul Vixie)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,comp.mail.headers
Subject: Eliot Lear's final words aren't about this problem
Message-ID: <34@volition.dec.com>
Date: 13 Aug 88 01:16:58 GMT
References: <3732@palo-alto.DEC.COM>  <22608@amdcad.AMD.COM> 
Organization: DEC Western Research Lab
Lines: 36

The folks at Rutgers seem intent on making us all work harder -- these obscene
message-id's they generate keep making RN blow up.  Yes, I know I can fix my
software, but why is it always Rutgers that makes things stretch to their
breaking point?  Sigh.  Not my topic, please ignore.

In article 
					lear@NET.BIO.NET (Eliot Lear) writes:
# My final words on the subject....
# 
#         Note:  The use of source routing is discouraged.   Unless  the
#                sender has special need of path restriction, the choice
#                of transmission route should be left to the mail  tran-
#                sport service.
# 
# [RFC-822: Section 6.7.2, Page 32]

Eliot,

The person you need to yell at for this offense is Dave Taylor.  ELM is the
only user agent I know of that has an option for automatic source routing.
Perhaps you can tell at Dan Heller, MUSH has everything else, it probably
has this too.

But you aren't addressing my complaint.

My mail transport software (sendmail) is selecting a source route.  Your
mail transport software (who knows?) is overriding it.

And note "unless the sender has special need of path restriction" -- this
means that if the sender has some reason to select a certain source route,
the mail transport software should respect that choice.
-- 
Paul Vixie
Digital Equipment Corporation	Work:  vixie@dec.com	Play:  paul@vixie.UUCP
Western Research Laboratory	 uunet!decwrl!vixie	   uunet!vixie!paul
Palo Alto, California, USA	  +1 415 853 6600	   +1 415 864 7013