> ps.  a note on the sender:  from:  etc argument.  BITNET/Netnorth/earn
> is based on on the VM RSCS format and (non)standards.  Everyone on
> bitnet has to pretend that they are an RSCS site so I dont see any
> reason what is wrong with basing our mail on what will be nice for VM
> sites...  (of course im biased being on VM but I must admit that i like
> seeing LSTSRV-L MAIL instead of LISTSERV MAIL the being normally
> something for the bitbucket anyway)
 
The "nice" format for a small IBN site is NOTE format; BITNET would not
do well using this for the following reasons:
 
1)  Not all sites pretend they are running IBM RSCS.  Otheriwse, IBM
    NOTE format would be accepted at UCBJADE, NETDATA would be accepted
    at CLUTX, messages would be accepted at ANLHEP, etc.
 
2)  IBM NOTE format was designed for a smaller network than Bitnet;
    the whole idea of MAILER's and other servers is to distribute the
    load and cut the duplicate files.  I can just see us going back to NOTE
    format and having a person at site X mail back to his old friends at
    site Y, thus dumping fourteen copies of the same mail going to the
    same node.  :-(
 
3)  Use of IBM standards for mail means we would not use RFC-822 headers,
    thus losing our shared format with the Internet and numerous local
    area networks.  Clarkson will soon (months?) be on Milnet and be
    starting a LAN for which [log in to unmask] is already the
    documented Bitnet gateway; if we chose to pretend that all our
    users are on IBM hosts (RSCS or NJE), will BITNET allow us to add
    a few hundred PC's as MAIL only RSCS routing entries?
 
Just because it's a corporate (IBM) standard doesn't mean it's right.
 
Drew Derbyshire