From: Rick Troth <TROTH(_at_)ricevm1(_dot_)rice(_dot_)edu>
< I still don't understand why this (and like-minded print or FAX servers)
< aren't addressed according to:
< pager+4159408776(_at_)pagerserver(_dot_)tpc(_dot_)int
< or even just
< +4159408776(_at_)pagerserver(_dot_)tpc(_dot_)int
< There's certainly nothing wrong with exploiting DNS and MX to solve this
< problem, but I'd like to hear from those who have considered the
< alternative(s) and prefer the above scheme (or don't).
AT&T Mail uses something similar for its fax deliveries. You address the
message to
attmail!fax!+4159408776
or (after domain-style addresses are finally implemented)
+4159408776(_at_)fax(_dot_)attmail(_dot_)com
I think this is definitely more intuitive than something like
fax(_at_)6(_dot_)7(_dot_)7(_dot_)8(_dot_)0(_dot_)4(_dot_)9(_dot_)5(_dot_)1(_dot_)4(_dot_)1(_dot_)attmail(_dot_)com(_dot_)
Tony Hansen
hansen(_at_)pegasus(_dot_)att(_dot_)com,
tony(_at_)attmail(_dot_)com
att!pegasus!hansen, attmail!tony