In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Neil W Rickert writes:
>The principle is supposed to be that the "From:" header identifies
>the author of the message, while the envelope sender or the "Sender:"
>header identifies the person responsible for sending it. The mailing
>list interpretation is actually a reasonable one. In principle it
>allows you, as a subscribed user, to submit a message written by a
>different author.
... but it doesn't allow "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", a subscribed user, to submit
a message unless the machine I'm on is actually named "plethora.net".
>It's actually more common to use the envelope sender, which often shows
>up as "Return-Path:" in the final delivered message.
Yes, it would be, but the listserv tech support people apparently use
the Sender, not the From.
>This distinction between authorship and administrative responsibility
>has turned out to be a very useful one, even if it happens to be
>causing your problems right now.
I agree that it's useful... I'm just not sure what to do when my mailer
wants to add a field which prevents my from mailing a list. The easy
solution is just to enable draft masquerading, and leave Sender: out.
>Program that do that (prefer "Sender:" to "Reply-To:" or "From:" for
>the purpose of replies) are badly broken. But that is not your
>problem, which relates more to the distinction between administrative
>responsibility and authorship.
It's an interesting point. I understand the intent of "only people subscribed
to a list may send mail to it", but given the meaninglessness of machines
these days, I would think it would make sense to accept a message if *either*
Sender *or* From was subscribed.
-s
