> Addresses without @ *are* fine. I would hate to see them considered
> as second-class citizens, since there are important classes of events
> in which non-@ address will be found. (Like people subscribing to a list
> that happens to be hosted on the machine they live on.)
This was my initial re-action to the first post. Also, addresses like
"user@host" are theoretically fine even if there are no dots in the
host part. It doesn't mean they are BITNET hosts, it could just mean
that the host is in the same domain as the MLM.
But as I started to flame on this, I remembered that experience has
taught most mail administrators to use FQN (Fully Qualified Names)
*everywhere*. Trust me. Your users will scream if they see
"mmorse@nsf.gov" rather than just "mmorse". They will say their
headers are too long and ugly. Ignore them. You (and they) will be
much happier with the full names.
Apparently, majordomo will too.
--Mike
Follow-Ups:
|
|
