Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!gatech!ncar!oddjob!kaon!nucsrl!gore
From: gore@eecs.nwu.edu (Jacob Gore)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: this might be getting out of hand...
Message-ID: <3400006@eecs.nwu.edu>
Date: 17 Aug 88 17:47:35 GMT
References: <3746@palo-alto.DEC.COM>
Organization: Northwestern U, Evanston IL, USA
Lines: 31

/ comp.mail.uucp / allbery@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon S. Allbery) / Aug 16, 1988 /
>as long as a UUCP mailer knows
>the *next* system in the path, it doesn't have to know the other systems.
>But domain-based (i.e. Internet non-UUCP) mailers do not use routing, so
>they must know the actual destination site!

That's not correct.  Explicit routing does exist within the RFC-822 world:

	@A,@B,...,@Y:user@Z

The RFC requires all names in the route to be registered domains, but I
doubt if any mailer pays any attention to this requirement.  My machine
just needs to know how to route to A, and then it's A's problem.  Very much
like UUCP paths with passive routing.

>Thus, I can send to some site
>"foobar" that is unknown to ncoast's mailer if *I* know the path, but
>someone on CWRU20 (if it still exists; it was a CSNet host) can't without
>hiding the UUCP syntax from the domain-based mailer and sending the mail to
>a CSNet/UUCP relay site.

gore 2> checkaddr -w @accuvax.nwu.edu:jacob@foobar
@accuvax.nwu.edu:jacob@foobar:
queueing for smtp-local: via 'accuvax.nwu.edu': '@accuvax.nwu.edu:jacob@foobar'
OK
gore 2> 

No problem.

Jacob Gore				Gore@EECS.NWU.Edu
Northwestern Univ., EECS Dept.		{oddjob,gargoyle,att}!nucsrl!gore