When LISTSERV sends a file to the mailer with 'To: JOE@RIGEL', the mailer
sends the file to [log in to unmask] This is a fact, and it is
this way because (a) the mailer is sitting in the local domain for local
reasons which are so important that usually the site would rather leave
BITNET than change this, (b) the mailer doesn't support the specification
of the fact that a particular virtual machine of the node is sitting in
another domain, and (c) you can have only one trusted mailer per node.
So, *today*, the situation is that a file distributed to JOE@HUNTER may
or may not be delivered, depending on the particular path chosen by DIST2
for this particular list, and there is nothing that the Princeton (for
this particular example) folks can do about it *today*. Maybe in mailer
2.14 there will be some new function that could solve the problem, but
mailer 2.14 isn't out yet.
Furthermore, it is generally good practice to always fully qualify
addresses. This removes ambiguities when going through mail gateways or
mailers serving people on several domains, and introduces no problem for
the end-user other than the visual inconvenience of the ugly '.BITNET'.
What about the receiving end? I don't know, ask people who have such a
LAN. What is sure is that if people from the local HUNTER subscribe to a
BITNET list, they will be recorded as HUNTER.PRINCETON.EDU and there will
be no problem. I don't know about PUCC lists.
But with the way LANs are set, it is very likely that this local HUNTER
node is a small machine, maybe a PC or a workstation. The BITNET node by
the same name is probably more important in size, and its users can
reasonably expect that, if they subscribe to a list, they will get mail
from that list. If that's not the case because of DIST2, people will have
to stop using DIST2. On the other hand, if the users of the local HUNTER
node cannot get on a list on the PUCC machine (and *only* on that
machine) because they are registered as 'HUNTER' without explicitly
domain form, they can always give a phone call to their local LISTSERV
administrator and ask him to register them with an explicit
HUNTER.PRINCETON.EDU, and then it will work. The amount of extra work on
the postmaster will eventually cause him to find a local solution to the
problem.
In any case we're talking about whether it's better to create a local
problem for a few LAN machines at a few sites, or a netwide problem for a
few BITNET machines which become effectively cut off the network. I am
responsible for making the software work for standard BITNET nodes, if it
creates problems for nodes with an ambiguous setup, it's no longer my
problem.
>Why needs mail to JOEUSER@RIGEL be qualified while files need not ???
Christian, be reasonable. You know very well that there is no such thing
as a domain when sending to RSCS, which is why RSCS addresses are not
"qualified". And there is no RSCS gateway to complain about this either
:-)
Eric
|
