In article <199707230916.LAA29871@???>,
Georg v.Zezschwitz <gvz@???> wrote:
>Hi around,
>
>we'd like to use Exim at all locations we provide instead of running
>Exim only at our main location.
>
>However, as we still have (and love) our UUCP-customers, we'd have
>to support them.
>
>In the UUCP-world, the old-stylish "Bang"-Format is still not dead.
>Configuring Exim to deliver mail to UUCP-customers seems to be no
>problem - the normal pipe-drivers should work well, if the customer
>is ready to accept mail in UUCP-style.
>
>However, customers might send mails in the Bang-Format, and there
>should be a rmail, that understands them.
>
>My idea is to write a rmail that converts Bang-format to FQDN and
>passes the jobs to Exim.
Using UUCP as a transport does not preclude using FQDN style
addresses. The bang!path addresses are a function of the mail
software at the far end.
Another response to this thread mentions how to rewrite them.
But a far better approach is to get people to properly configure
their mail system to use domain addresses. I don't think there
is a mail system (well ok Unix based mail system) released
since 1990 that didn't work (better) with FQDN's. I.e. you
have to work real hard to make them work with bang!paths.
Other than that I highly encourage and support people using
UUCP as the transport mechanism. Running UUCP over TCP/IP
is a very nice solution for sites that have intermittant
(dialup PPP for example) connections. Far simpler to get
working than trying to force an SMTP connection after
you get connected.
--
Stuart Lynne <sl@???> 604-933-1000 <http://www.poste.com>
PGP Fingerprint: 28 E2 A0 15 99 62 9A 00 88 EC A3 EE 2D 1C 15 68
