On 01 Mar 1998 16:23:02 +1300, Carey Evans wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Stern) writes: > > > On Thu, 26 Feb 1998 22:19:37 EST, Lee Bradshaw wrote: > > [snip] > > > > If I didn't mention this before, I'm not cc'ing you because ipa.net > > > rejects my "from " lines as spam. > > > > I don't understand why a correct header would be rejected. I'd like to > > see some details for the basis to this claim, because I use the same > > address style as you and Daniel. Please tell. > > What about the envelope sender? sendmail writes this as: > > From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Mar 1 16:12:31
There's some strong negative remarks about the use of the From (without the colon) field in the IETF Mailing Headers Draft: ------------------------------------------------------------------- 3.4 Sender and recipient indication (1) This header field should From (not not standardized never appear in e-mail being followed by a for use in e-mail sent, and should thus not appear colon) in this memo. It is however included, since people often ask about it. This header field is used in the so-called Unix mailbox format, also known as Berkely mailbox format or the MBOX format. This is a format for storing a set of messages in a file. A line beginning with "From " is used to separate successive messages in such files. This header field will thus appear when you use a text editor to look at a file in the Unix mailbox format. Some mailers also use this format when printing messages on paper. The information in this header field should NOT be used to find an address to which replies to a message are to be sent. (2) Used in Usenet News mail From RFC 976: 2.4 for transport, to indicate the path or use in Usenet News through which an article has gone >From when transferred to a new host. (not followed by a colon) Sometimes called "From_" header field. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ By contrast, the Sender: line is standard (though somewhat vague): ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The person or agent submitting Sender: RFC 822: 4.4.2, the message to the network, if RFC 1123: 5.2.15- other than shown by the From: 16, 5.3.7. header field. Should be authenticated, according to RFC 822, but what kind of authentication is not clear. Some implementations expect that the e-mail address used in this field can be used to reach the sender, others do not. See also "X-Sender". ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > or something similar at the top of the message. qmail puts: > > Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > as RFC821 and RFC822 (4.3.1, 4.4.3) suggest. > > It appears that the Debian list server renames this to > "X-Envelope-Sender:" before passing the message on, which shows that > Lee Bradshaw's envelope sender is (or has been) > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", and yours (David Stern's) is > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". At least "localhost" will succeed in some DNS > lookups. (I had my envelope sender set wrong until recently too. > It's difficult to notice.) And it *is* forged by spammers. Some DNS's confirming localhost (127.0.0.1) is probably why I'm able to post here. Seems wrong, but at the moment I'm glad. > The Return-Path is where bounced email should go, BTW, which is partly > why it gets forged. Have either of you received any bounces lately? I got bounced mailing today: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - '<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>SIZE=2824' sender address target 'localhost' is not a valid e-mail domain. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - In case anyone is picking up and missed my original post, I'll reask my questions. I've read the relevant RFC (and more), but some of the terminology is prohibitive to my understanding: --------------------------------------------------------------------- RFC822(STD11) 3.4.6: o Parentheses ("(" and ")") are used to indicate com- ments. o Angle brackets ("<" and ">") are generally used to indicate the presence of a one machine-usable refer- ence (e.g., delimiting mailboxes), possibly including source-routing to the machine. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- What does that bit about "one machine-usable reference (e.g., delimiting mailboxes) .. source-routing .." mean? Most importantly are both "Joe User <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" and "[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joe User)" in keeping with standards? -- David Stern ------------------------------------------------------------------ http://weber.u.washington.edu/~kotsya [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .