usefor-article-05 July 2001

5.6.6.  Example


      Path: foo.isp.example/
         foo-server/bar.isp.example?10.123.12.2/old.site.example!
         barbaz/baz.isp.example%dialup123.baz.isp.example!x

        NOTE: That article was injected into the news stream by
        baz.isp.example (complaints may be addressed to
        usenet@baz.isp.example). The injector has taken care to record
        that it got it from dialup123.baz.isp.example. "x" is the
        default tail entry, though sometimes a real userid is put there.

        The article was relayed, perhaps by UUCP, to the machine known,
        at least to its downstream, as "barbaz".

        Barbaz relayed it to old.site.example, which does not yet
        conform to this standard (hence the '!' delimiter). So one
        cannot be sure that it really came from barbaz.

        Old.site.example relayed it to a site claiming to have the IP
        address [10.123.12.2], and claiming (by using the '/' delimiter)
        to have verified that it came from old.site.example.

        [10.123.12.2] relayed it to "foo-server" which, not being
        convinced that it truly came from [10.123.12.2], did a reverse
        lookup on the actual source and concluded it was known as
        bar.isp.example (that is not to say that [10.123.12.2] was not a
        correct IP address for bar.isp.example, but simply that that
        connection could not be substantiated by foo-server).  Observe
        that foo-server has now added two entries to the Path.
        "foo-server" is a locally significant name within the complex
        site of many machines run by foo.isp.example, so the latter
        should have no problem recognizing foo-server and using a '/'
        delimiter.  Presumably foo.isp.example then delivered the
        article to its direct clients.

        It appears that foo.isp.example and old.site.example decided to
        fold the line, on the grounds that it seemed to be getting a
        little too long.

--- ../usefor-article-04/1_Example.out          April 2001
+++ ../usefor-article-05/1_Example.out          July 2001
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 
       Path: foo.isp.example/
-         .foo-server/bar.isp.example?10.123.12.2/old.site.example!
+         foo-server/bar.isp.example?10.123.12.2/old.site.example!
          barbaz/baz.isp.example%dialup123.baz.isp.example!x
 
         NOTE: That article was injected into the news stream by
@@ -10,8 +10,9 @@
         usenet@baz.isp.example). The injector has taken care to record
         that it got it from dialup123.baz.isp.example. "x" is the
         default tail entry, though sometimes a real userid is put there.
-        The article was relayed, perhaps by UUCP, to the machine known
-        in the UUCP maps database as "barbaz".
+
+        The article was relayed, perhaps by UUCP, to the machine known,
+        at least to its downstream, as "barbaz".
 
         Barbaz relayed it to old.site.example, which does not yet
         conform to this standard (hence the '!' delimiter). So one
@@ -21,20 +22,18 @@
         address [10.123.12.2], and claiming (by using the '/' delimiter)
         to have verified that it came from old.site.example.
 
-        [10.123.12.2] relayed it to ".foo-server" which, not being
+        [10.123.12.2] relayed it to "foo-server" which, not being
         convinced that it truly came from [10.123.12.2], did a reverse
         lookup on the actual source and concluded it was known as
         bar.isp.example (that is not to say that [10.123.12.2] was not a
         correct IP address for bar.isp.example, but simply that that
-        connection could not be substantiated by .foo-server).  Observe
-        that .foo-server has now added two entries to the Path.
-
-        ".foo-server" is a locally significant name (observe the
-        presence of the '.')  within the complex site of many machines
-        run by foo.isp.example, so the latter should have no problem
-        recognizing .foo-server and using a '/' delimiter.  Presumably
-        foo.isp.example then delivered the article to its direct
-        clients.
+        connection could not be substantiated by foo-server).  Observe
+        that foo-server has now added two entries to the Path.
+        "foo-server" is a locally significant name within the complex
+        site of many machines run by foo.isp.example, so the latter
+        should have no problem recognizing foo-server and using a '/'
+        delimiter.  Presumably foo.isp.example then delivered the
+        article to its direct clients.
 
         It appears that foo.isp.example and old.site.example decided to
         fold the line, on the grounds that it seemed to be getting a