Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id LAA00363; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 11:41:59 -0500 (EST) Received: by cs.utk.edu (bulk_mailer v1.13); Mon, 12 Mar 2001 11:40:25 -0500 Received: by cs.utk.edu (cf v2.9s-UTK) id LAA29939; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 11:40:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from knecht.Neophilic.COM (marvin@localhost) by cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id LAA29921; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 11:40:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from knecht.Neophilic.COM (209.31.233.176 -> knecht.sendmail.org) by cs.utk.edu (smtpshim v1.0); Mon, 12 Mar 2001 11:40:23 -0500 Received: from knecht.Neophilic.COM (localhost.Neophilic.COM [127.0.0.1]) by knecht.Neophilic.COM (8.12.0.Beta5/8.12.0.Beta5) with ESMTP id f2CGeMYZ076255; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 08:40:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200103121640.f2CGeMYZ076255@knecht.Neophilic.COM> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Keith Moore From: Eric Allman X-URL: http://WWW.Sendmail.ORG/~eric cc: drums@cs.utk.edu Subject: Re: history of using a comment for display-name? In-reply-to: Mail from Keith Moore dated Mon, 12 Mar 2001 08:30:33 EST <200103121330.IAA12426@astro.cs.utk.edu> Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 08:40:22 -0800 Sender: eric@knecht.Neophilic.COM List-Unsubscribe: Robert and Keith are correct. Remember, when sendmail (and delivermail) appeared, the Internet didn't exist, and the network world had many more users on UUCP than on ARPAnet/Internet (remember the "acceptable use policy"?). Far more mailers could handle ``address (name)'' than ``name
'', probably because the former syntax was already in use on Usenet. Couple this with the relatively strange restrictions on "." and "'" in RFC-822 -- folks like Mike O'Dell and Almost Anyone Jr. had to quote their full names, auto-quoting not being common in mailers at that time. Clearly the Internet has won out over UUCP, which is why sendmail has been using ``name
'' for about ten years now. eric ============= In Reply To: =========================================== : From: Keith Moore : Subject: Re: history of using a comment for display-name? : Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 08:30:33 -0500 : > Additionally section 3.4.3 does state that comments must not be included : > during protocol exchanges with mail servers.. and thus if I interpret it : > correctly, sendmail is non-RFC822 compliant then. : : nope. that's not what section 3.4.3 means. : : in practice, comments were the "preferred form" of representing names : for many years after RFC 822 was published. this was due to several : reasons: : : - there were rumors of old mailers still in use that couldn't handle a : phrase before the address : : - Usenet (RFC 1036) used comments, didn't support phrase, and gateways : between mail and news were fairly common. : : - many mailers could be configured to automatically add a name as a : phrase but would not quote that name if it contained special : characters (most notably ".") - thus mailers configured to use : phrase for name developed a reputation for producing badly : formed messages. : : - people didn't update their old sendmail.cf files, thus use of : comments for names remained quite common and thus seemed "normal". :