From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/36409
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 10:56:26 -0400
Sender: prj@multivac.cwru.edu
Message-ID: <m3bsohfpe7.fsf@multivac.cwru.edu>
References: <vafg0dwrpyh.fsf@lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de>
	<01May23.141128edt.115245@gateway.intersys.com>
	<vaf3d9uq4c4.fsf@lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de>
	<01May24.115917edt.115250@gateway.intersys.com>
	<vafsnhuk8t2.fsf@lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de>
	<01May24.143521edt.115214@gateway.intersys.com>
	<m3r8xeh8qw.fsf@multivac.cwru.edu>
	<01May24.153439edt.115213@gateway.intersys.com>
	<m3itiqh6by.fsf@multivac.cwru.edu>
	<01May24.163305edt.115259@gateway.intersys.com>
	<vafitiqjr4w.fsf@lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de>
	<m3zoc21a46.fsf@peorth.gweep.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035171998 8436 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 03:46:38 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:46:38 +0000 (UTC)
Return-Path: <owner-ding@gnus.org>
Original-Received: (qmail 15727 invoked by alias); 25 May 2001 14:56:27 -0000
Original-Received: (qmail 15722 invoked from network); 25 May 2001 14:56:27 -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 14:56:27 -0000
Original-Received: (qmail 28498 invoked by uid 500); 25 May 2001 14:56:48 -0000
Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org
Original-To: "\(ding\)" <ding@gnus.org>
In-Reply-To: <m3zoc21a46.fsf@peorth.gweep.net> (Stainless Steel Rat's message of "24 May 2001 21:38:17 -0400")
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) Emacs/20.7
Original-Lines: 30
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:36409
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:36409

Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> writes:
> * Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Gro=DFjohann)  on Thu, 24 May 2=
001
>| If the Sender field contains the FQDN of the host, and the machine is
>| turned off, you're screwed.
>=20
> *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?
>=20
> 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