Tuesday, January 18, 2000, 8:11:29 PM, Thomas wrote:
> No. Constructive means you have an idea what to "do", not what to "not
> do".
No. Constructive means pointing out when people are about to step off a
cliff and fall a great distance to very large and sharp rocks at the bottom..
IE, pointing out when they are clearly going to do something wrong and
preventing them from doing so means you are preventing harm and, thus,
suggesting something good.
> our suggestion for redirect behaviour would be to just leave the from addr
> intact?
Yes, that is the point of bounces. Further, call the things bounces.
Call kludges headers. Use , to separate addresses in the header fields, not
;.
> So you actually want to hide the fact that you are the one who
> actually sent this mail to the final recipient?
*sigh*
RFC822, published in 1982, section 4.2
4.2. FORWARDING
Some systems permit mail recipients to forward a message,
retaining the original headers, by adding some new fields. This
standard supports such a service, through the "Resent-" prefix to
field names.
Whenever the string "Resent-" begins a field name, the field
has the same semantics as a field whose name does not have the
prefix. However, the message is assumed to have been forwarded
by an original recipient who attached the "Resent-" field. This
new field is treated as being more recent than the equivalent,
original field. For example, the "Resent-From", indicates the
person that forwarded the message, whereas the "From" field indi-
cates the original author.
Use of such precedence information depends upon partici-
pants' communication needs. For example, this standard does not
dictate when a "Resent-From:" address should receive replies, in
lieu of sending them to the "From:" address.
Note: In general, the "Resent-" fields should be treated as con-
taining a set of information that is independent of the
set of original fields. Information for one set should
not automatically be taken from the other. The interpre-
tation of multiple "Resent-" fields, of the same type, is
undefined.
In the remainder of this specification, occurrence of legal
"Resent-" fields are treated identically with the occurrence of
fields whose names do not contain this prefix.
Please not that in the first paragraph it says "retaining the original
headers". This has become known as bouncing (*NOT* "redirecting which is a
Eudora abomination) while forwarding means the headers change and the body of
the message contains the original message with an optional note attached.
Do I mean to bounce a message without an indication of where it came from?
No. Am I saying do it the way the 18 year old RFC states and has been done by
damn near every other client *EXCEPT* for the broken Eudora during those 18
years? Yes.
I didn't think I'd have to point this out considering the mailer should be
RFC compliant in the first place. That implies the authors have actually read
the RFCs.
> So, if you don't like "by way of", please make a constructive
> suggestion.
Do *NOT* do it. That is constructive. Don't like it, read the effing
RFCs. Amazingly, a lot of the problems you're grappling with have been solved
for decades now.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
