No From or Reply-to? Hmmm...

Had to go look.

>From RFC 822:

     4.4.2.  SENDER / RESENT-SENDER

        This field contains the authenticated identity  of  the  AGENT
        (person,  system  or  process)  that sends the message.  It is
        intended for use when the sender is not the author of the mes-
        sage,  or  to  indicate  who among a group of authors actually
        sent the message.  If the contents of the "Sender" field would
        be  completely  redundant  with  the  "From"  field,  then the
        "Sender" field need not be present and its use is  discouraged
        (though  still legal).  In particular, the "Sender" field MUST
        be present if it is NOT the same as the "From" Field.

Appears that the "Sender" field is valid, though discouraged.

But further on in RFC822:

     4.4.4.  AUTOMATIC USE OF FROM / SENDER / REPLY-TO

        For systems which automatically  generate  address  lists  for
        replies to messages, the following recommendations are made:

            o   The "Sender" field mailbox should be sent  notices  of
                any  problems in transport or delivery of the original
                messages.  If there is no  "Sender"  field,  then  the
                "From" field mailbox should be used.

            o   The  "Sender"  field  mailbox  should  NEVER  be  used
                automatically, in a recipient's reply message.
        ...

We _do_ use the Sender field for errors, and the second 
bullet indicates that the sender field is not appropriate
for mail lists.

So, bottom line, if there is no "From" header or "Reply-to" 
header a message will not be posted to a list (except via
one of the hacks that were talked about here--and fixed in
5.05) or be able to join a list.

Bob

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Gary Mauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 14:15:52 -0500

>> The list server uses the "Reply-To:" address to subscribe.
> If there is no "Reply-to:" it uses the "From:". 

I just had Stephen Lack send me a private message using Outlook 98

There was neither a "Reply-to:" nor a "From:" line....
Sender: "Stephen Lack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

What happens when the list server sees that?

Gary Mauer

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Host/Moderator of the Window Cleaning Network
  - Your People, Product and Information Site -
       http://www.window-cleaning-net.com/

       Email Groups - 800 Networking Links
    8 Bulletin Board and 21 Trade Show Links


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Robert Stull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 1999 1:04 PM
Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] sending from web messaging


> The list server uses the "Reply-To:" address to subscribe.
> If there is no "Reply-to:" it uses the "From:". Web messaging
> sets your reply-to to the "Reply-to" set in "User Information"
> which you can set to be anything you want, but _defaults_ to
> the IMail Official Hostname IE:
> IMail OHN = mail.domain.com
> Default web reply-to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Bob
> 
> ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
> From: "Window Cleaning Network Host" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Wed,  9 Ju
> --
> R. Stull
> Programmer
> Ipswitch, Inc.
> http://www.ipswitch.com/
> --
> 



--
R. Stull
Programmer
Ipswitch, Inc.
http://www.ipswitch.com/
--

Reply via email to