Hallo Gerard, On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 09:31:36 +0200GMT (17-9-03, 9:31 +0200, where I live), you wrote:
RO>> Because the To: header isn't (shouldn't be) used for routing. You can RO>> put in your To: header what you like or don't use it at all. The RO>> destination for a message gets transferred via the so called 'smtp RO>> envelope' and it doesn't get saved in the message. G> The so called 'smtp envelope' is initially uild from the info the G> sender provides in the To field. Or do you know a way to send an G> email without a to: field ? Sure. Create a message without a To: header, but with a BCC: Actually that's something that's recently being discussed and done on TBOT. Apart from that, there's no reason at all for messages to be sent from the address mentioned in the From: header or to be sent to the address mentioned in the To: header. An example of the latter is this message: I'm putting [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the To: header and that's where it goes, but afterwards it's being send to you, me and some more. That re-addressing is done solely by means of the smtp-envelope, after all the To: header remains the same. And there's no relaying mta that thinks the To: header should be altered. (Some insert one when it's missing, but altering is never done.) I realise that TB can't send a message without addressing it to the address in the To: header, but that's because TB is written as a normal e-mail client and not as something that does silly tricks. But it's rather easy for me to write a simple script for my mail server that creates a message with a valid To: header while the message itself is being send to somewhere else. -- Groetjes, Roelof ________________________________________________ Current version is 2.00 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
