Hello, the Bat! list recipients,
Saturday, December 23, 2000, Syafril Hermansyah wrote to Thomas Fernandez about
Opinion: "Blind Copy" emails should warn / not allow reply to original recipient:
TF>> I doubt this. When the client received a BCC copy, then it would
TF>> not be in the headers of your friend's employee's incoming email
TF>> at all. He can hit Reply All all he wants, the reply will go only
TF>> to the addresses in the TO and CC headers of the incoming email.
SH> 100 % correct, and RFC state as that. BCC: address *must* not listed
SH> on the recipient message header.
Not really. RFC states that both CC and BCC recipients might be listed
or not. That only depends on server administration preference wich are
in turn based on tradition and common sence. But that doesn't mean
that server which leaves BCC addresses in headers are breaking RFC.
--
Best regards,
Oleg Zalyalov. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using The Bat! version 1.48f
under Windows NT 4.0 Build 1381 Service Pack 6
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
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]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
