Barry Wainwright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On 13/12/01 4:18 pm, "Allen Watson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>It's in one of the RFCs, I don't recall which. We went through this >>somewhere recently, and it ended up with people having differing opinions >>about how the standard should be interpreted, so finding the reference >>probably won't settle the question. > >It wasn't this list, it was the other one: >[SNIP thread (from tester list?)]
I don't suppose anyone remebers which RFC it is that's being referred to here? See `cause AFAIR, you only ever need the From and Date fields to make a valid RFC822 message. The To, CC, and BCC fields are optional and advisory; the real recipient info is in the envelope and that is goverened by SMTP (as amended and abridged) which AFAIK doesn't even require there to be _any_ recipients (pointless, but allowable). I'm no email guru so I could well be, maybe even probably am, wrong on this. But I have an interest in the subject so I'd kinda like to check for myself. So: _Why_ (which RFC) makes people think at least one address is required? If the standards don't mandate it, but some ISP(s) do, the right solution is to fix the ISP, not Entourage. IM_H_O... -- To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To search the archives: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
