Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id DAA01718; Sun, 4 Jun 1995 03:15:52 -0400 X-Resent-To: drums@CS.UTK.EDU ; Sun, 4 Jun 1995 03:15:51 EDT Errors-to: owner-drums@CS.UTK.EDU Received: from domen.uninett.no by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id DAA01703; Sun, 4 Jun 1995 03:15:49 -0400 From: Message-Id: <199506040715.DAA01703@CS.UTK.EDU> Received: from localhost.uninett.no by domen.uninett.no with SMTP (PP) id <17725-0@domen.uninett.no>; Sun, 4 Jun 1995 09:15:03 +0200 X-Mailer: exmh version 1.5.3 12/28/94 To: Eric Thomas cc: drums@CS.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: getting started In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 31 May 1995 21:18:28 +0200." <199505311934.PAA16627@CS.UTK.EDU> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 04 Jun 1995 09:15:00 +0200 Sender: Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no Eric, my (hopefully more realistic) view of what he is trying to say is: "Gateways that drop or damage the envelope FROM address are a nuisance. A well-specified gateway to the Internet should specify how to preserve this information and, if possible, encourage UAs in the non-Internet environment to use it properly. Any gateway specification that fails to do so is incomplete, and should not be standardized". We all have to live with broken software. Including the fact that it is *very* hard to make one address do the work of two. If we want to survive this WG (it wasn't named DRUMS because we expected only soft, small drops of rain to hit it :-), we have to try to keep our voices down. Me too! Harald A