Re: Sender header?

[prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc)]

Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> writes:
> * Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann)  on Thu, 24 May 2001
>| If the Sender field contains the FQDN of the host, and the machine is
>| turned off, you're screwed.
> 
> *sigh*
> Not if your MX records are set up correctly.

Where do the RFCs support your notion of correctness WRT MX records?

>| Why do you want to forbid me from putting there an address which I
>| know to work better than user@FQDN?
> 
> Because right now, for example, ratinox@newsguy.com could be who I am when
> I write this message, but it is not who I am when I send it.

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.

> The domain part of an RFC 2822 mailbox must be a fully qualified domain
> name.

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.


paul