From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/36435 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Sender header? Date: 25 May 2001 16:39:21 -0400 Sender: prj@multivac.cwru.edu Message-ID: References: <01May23.141128edt.115245@gateway.intersys.com> <01May24.115917edt.115250@gateway.intersys.com> <01May24.143521edt.115214@gateway.intersys.com> <01May24.153439edt.115213@gateway.intersys.com> <01May24.163305edt.115259@gateway.intersys.com> <01May25.161238edt.115273@gateway.intersys.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035172019 8547 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 03:46:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:46:59 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: (qmail 19433 invoked by alias); 25 May 2001 20:39:22 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 19428 invoked from network); 25 May 2001 20:39:22 -0000 Original-Received: from multivac.student.cwru.edu (HELO multivac.cwru.edu) (261@129.22.96.25) by gnus.org with SMTP; 25 May 2001 20:39:22 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 29535 invoked by uid 500); 25 May 2001 20:39:43 -0000 Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org Original-To: "\(ding\)" In-Reply-To: <01May25.161238edt.115273@gateway.intersys.com> (Stainless Steel Rat's message of "Fri, 25 May 2001 16:12:17 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) Emacs/20.7 Original-Lines: 41 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:36435 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:36435 Stainless Steel Rat writes: > * prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) on Fri, 25 May 2001 >| Where do the RFCs support your notion of correctness WRT MX records? > > MX records make it possible to deliver mail that would otherwise bounce off > of a host that is not configured to accept mail. Right (although it also requires help from the server named in the MX record - even if that server accepts mail, it doesn't necessarily accept mail addressed to arbitrary domains). But who says I want to receive such mail anyway? If all the addresses I use have "@domain.com", then I can expect that no one will send mail addressed to blah.domain.com, so I have no need to bother with extra MX records. >| You are always the same person, and all your mailboxes identify you >| equally well all the time. The fact that you're using only one of >| them at any given moment changes nothing. > > You are incorrect. Gee, thanks for explaining. I see nothing in 2822 to suggest that Sender should indicate the host where a message originated. If you do, please point it out. >| I see no such requirement. Using an unqualified name like >| "prj@multivac" will indeed break things, of course. But you're also >| inventing the requirement for a *particular* FQDN - the local one. >| This requirement is not in RFC 2822. > > You are again incorrect. Read the definitions again. The string "prj@multivac" is generated by the grammar for "mailbox". If the requirement for a FQDN is somewhere else, I missed it. And actually, the grammar *prohibits* an absolute domain name as defined by RFC 1034. Or did you mean something other than "absolute" by: > The domain part of an RFC 2822 mailbox must be a fully qualified domain > name. paul