I took the info from RFC2821, which probably overrules 1123;
http://rfc.net/rfc2821.html

Im curious how this would be achieved without setting the return-path:
header previously:

"It is possible for the mailbox in the return path to be different
from the actual sender's mailbox, for example, if error responses are
to be delivered to a special error handling mailbox rather than to
the message sender.  When mailing lists are involved, this
arrangement is common and useful as a means of directing errors to
the list maintainer rather than the message originator."

Because setting the header previously is prohibited:

"A message-originating SMTP system SHOULD NOT send a message that
already contains a Return-path header.  SMTP servers performing a
relay function MUST NOT inspect the message data, and especially not
to the extent needed to determine if Return-path headers are present.
SMTP servers making final delivery MAY remove Return-path headers
before adding their own.

The primary purpose of the Return-path is to designate the address to
which messages indicating non-delivery or other mail system failures
are to be sent.  For this to be unambiguous, exactly one return path
SHOULD be present when the message is delivered.  Systems using RFC
822 syntax with non-SMTP transports SHOULD designate an unambiguous
address, associated with the transport envelope, to which error
reports (e.g., non-delivery messages) should be sent."

And then there's this which notes an error in RFC 822:

"Historical note: Text in RFC 822 that appears to contradict the use
of the Return-path header (or the envelope reverse path address from
the MAIL command) as the destination for error messages is not
applicable on the Internet.  The reverse path address (as copied into
the Return-path) MUST be used as the target of any mail containing
delivery error messages."

Count to that that imail doesn't handle return-path: headers as required
by the RFC and I know for sure that I myself won't be messing with these
headers.

-- 
Regards,

Terrence Koeman

Technical Director/Administrator
MediaMonks B.V. (www.mediamonks.nl)

Please quote all replies in correspondence. 

- -----Original Message-----
- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
- [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt
- Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 18:30
- To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Return-Path - proper use?
- 
- 
- RFC 1123 (http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/cgi-bin/rfc/rfc1123.html)
- 
- "IMPLEMENTATION: The MAIL FROM: information may be passed as 
- a parameter or in a Return-Path: line inserted at the 
- beginning of the message."
- 
- >> Allthough I don't see how the last server should acquire 
- the address 
- >> for
- the return-path: <<
- 
- Well - it seems to me as if the last server has 
- responsibility to report back to the relaying server that  it 
- was contacted from?  So taking it from the MAIL FROM makes 
- sense.  That's the SAME information the SMTP server would 
- use, if it needs to send a bounce message, such as "Mailbox Full".
- 
- >> if it i desired that this address is different than the 
- Envelope from 
- >> or
- the From: header. <<
- 
- But isn't the Envelope FROM supposed to be the "return path". 
-  If we already have a header FROM: and header "REPLY-TO" for 
- client replies, and the Envelop FROM for server replies - why 
- do we need a forth?
- 
- Best Regards
- Andy Schmidt
- 
- Phone:  +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
- Fax:    +1 201 934-9206
- 
- ---
- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus 
(http://www.declude.com)]

---

This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list.  To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type
"unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail".  You can E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] for
assistance.  You can visit our web site at http://www.declude.com .

---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]

---

This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list.  To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail".  You can E-mail
[EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance.  You can visit our web
site at http://www.declude.com .

Reply via email to