From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/4825 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Sten Drescher Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: (gnus-inews-domain-name); insertion of Sender: Date: 19 Jan 1996 12:05:36 -0600 Organization: Tandem Computers Sender: dreschs@mpd.tandem.com Message-ID: <5568e82h73.fsf@galil.austnsc.tandem.com> References: <199601181337.OAA28961@ssv4.dina.kvl.dk> <199601190834.JAA01129@ssv4.dina.kvl.dk> <199601191014.LAA01179@ssv4.dina.kvl.dk> <199601191422.PAA01295@ssv4.dina.kvl.dk> Reply-To: Sten Drescher NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035145518 30963 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:25:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:25:18 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by miranova.com (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA02548 for ; Fri, 19 Jan 1996 12:30:09 -0800 Original-Received: from galil.austnsc.tandem.com (kneehigh.mpd.tandem.com [131.124.250.14]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Fri, 19 Jan 1996 19:06:27 +0100 Original-Received: (from dreschs@localhost) by galil.austnsc.tandem.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) id MAA01296; Fri, 19 Jan 1996 12:05:44 -0600 (CST) Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no In-Reply-To: Per Abrahamsen's message of Fri, 19 Jan 1996 15:22:06 +0100 Original-Lines: 47 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:4825 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:4825 Per Abrahamsen said: >>>>>> "PP" == Per Persson writes: PP> So using a half-hearted/intelligent authentication method which PP> might return bogus values is better then letting the user make sure PP> that the value returned is correct? Thanks for clearing things out PP> for me. PA> A value provided by the user is per definition wrong for the Sender: PA> field. The Sender: field is not expected to reflect the users mail PA> address. That would have been really stupid, as we already have the PA> From: field for that. Incorrect. It _must_ reflect the users mail address if it is present: rfc822> 4.1. SYNTAX [...] rfc822> authentic = "From" ":" mailbox ; Single author rfc822> / ( "Sender" ":" mailbox ; Actual submittor rfc822> "From" ":" 1#mailbox) ; Multiple authors rfc822> ; or not sender [...] rfc822> 4.4.2. SENDER / RESENT-SENDER rfc822> This field contains the authenticated identity of the AGENT rfc822> (person, system or process) that sends the message. It is rfc822> intended for use when the sender is not the author of the mes- rfc822> sage, or to indicate who among a group of authors actually sent rfc822> the message. If the contents of the "Sender" field would be rfc822> completely redundant with the "From" field, then the "Sender" rfc822> field need not be present and its use is discouraged (though rfc822> still legal). In particular, the "Sender" field MUST be present rfc822> if it is NOT the same as the "From" Field. -- #include /* Sten Drescher */ 1973 Steelers About Three Bricks Shy of a Load 1994 Steelers 1974 Steelers And the Load Filled Up 1995 Steelers? To get my PGP public key, send me email with your public key and Subject: PGP key exchange Key fingerprint = 90 5F 1D FD A6 7C 84 5E A9 D3 90 16 B2 44 C4 F3 Unsolicited email advertisements will be proofread for a US$100/page fee.