Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id PAA18851; Wed, 31 May 1995 15:55:36 -0400
X-Resent-To: drums@CS.UTK.EDU ; Wed, 31 May 1995 15:55:35 EDT
Errors-to: owner-drums@CS.UTK.EDU
Received: from leibniz.math.psu.edu by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id PAA18830; Wed, 31 May 1995 15:55:33 -0400
Received: from augusta.math.psu.edu (barr@augusta.math.psu.edu [146.186.132.2]) by leibniz.math.psu.edu (8.6.10/8.6.9) with ESMTP id PAA26246 for <drums@CS.UTK.EDU>; Wed, 31 May 1995 15:55:23 -0400
Received: from localhost (barr@localhost) by augusta.math.psu.edu (8.6.10/8.6.9) with ESMTP id PAA01422 for <drums@CS.UTK.EDU>; Wed, 31 May 1995 15:55:22 -0400
Message-Id: <199505311955.PAA01422@augusta.math.psu.edu>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6 4/21/95
To: drums@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject: Re: getting started 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 31 May 1995 15:36:21 EDT."
             <199505311936.PAA12316@wilma.cs.utk.edu> 
X-Face: $+9-wYg.[->94HJ{go[7Q]E!K&hUg7ZhLyCMyq_FU*ca0GazE>^/2BKLcK0bP-'%;Nn?M<m
 c~dP_j^A?M5Jw{+a7vcMu|M-mq"V4AzKq?mPMMNP\;f8J0n\-L]ODU)YMP;-pF>+am,jlSP>1K$iz@
 %'v'FEW{@](U&Ed/}>ju3Ctlr!XwJ27Q)7h2a%"`sz;j:/3EC[mXi@*X@HE1]'ddq$ZX"ePsMyTkeg
 >zdML.SV<t=R>vX1W`adGIUD
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 15:55:21 -0400
From: Dave Barr <barr@math.psu.edu>

In message <199505311936.PAA12316@wilma.cs.utk.edu>, Keith Moore writes:
>> Granted there are gateways which destroy this out-of-band address,
>> but they should not be allowed to coexist with the Internet mail
>> system.
>
>I don't know how we can police things.

After reading this, I realize my words exaggerated my intent.

What I meant to say is that if a gateway is set up such that
it destroys the envelope FROM information, that it must not generate
any messages which would be sent the address which was destroyed
(e.g. bounces).  Alternately the system may direct such messages
to a human for manual processing.

The problem with mail loops and misdirected mail is more important
than bounce notification, IMHO.  Probably others disagree.

--Dave