From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/44918 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Who sets Sender:? Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 17:51:29 -0400 Organization: What did you have in mind? A short, blunt, human pyramid? Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <87bsbak1ws.fsf@nwalsh.com> <87d6vqtqnv.fsf@squeaker.lickey.com> <02May21.105936edt.119176@gateway.intersystems.com> <02May21.122206edt.119093@gateway.intersystems.com> <02May21.142858edt.119269@gateway.intersystems.com> <02May21.154121edt.119281@gateway.intersystems.com> <02May21.171141edt.119208@gateway.intersystems.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1022017864 22406 127.0.0.1 (21 May 2002 21:51:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 21:51:04 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17AHX5-0005pH-00 for ; Tue, 21 May 2002 23:51:04 +0200 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 17AHWX-0003Yu-00; Tue, 21 May 2002 16:50:29 -0500 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Tue, 21 May 2002 16:50:48 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (qmailr@sclp3.sclp.com [209.196.61.66]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA11144 for ; Tue, 21 May 2002 16:50:35 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: (qmail 9267 invoked by alias); 21 May 2002 21:50:12 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 9262 invoked from network); 21 May 2002 21:50:11 -0000 Original-Received: from multivac.student.cwru.edu (HELO multivac.cwru.edu) (qmailr@129.22.96.25) by gnus.org with SMTP; 21 May 2002 21:50:11 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 4440 invoked by uid 500); 21 May 2002 21:51:52 -0000 Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: <02May21.171141edt.119208@gateway.intersystems.com> (Stainless Steel Rat's message of "Tue, 21 May 2002 17:16:36 -0400") Mail-Copies-To: nobody Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org Original-Lines: 59 User-Agent: Gnus/5.090007 (Oort Gnus v0.07) Emacs/21.2 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:44918 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:44918 Stainless Steel Rat wrote: > * prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) on Tue, 21 May 2002 > | Is the MUA supposed to be able to determine when Sender is needed? > > If the user fails to create a Sender header when it is required then the > MUA needs to be able to do so. In many (most?) cases the MUA must guess > because it cannot read the minds of the originator or sender. In what cases should the MUA guess that Sender is needed? > | > and that an attempt has been made at getting the address correct if the > | > user has not done so himself. > | I can't find that criterion in RFC 2822. Can you point it out? > > Definition of addr-spec plus requirements of RFC 2821 and the other > protocols involved in mail handling. Chapter and verse, please. > | user@hostname is often not a working address - I'd say it's wrong more > | often than right. > > ... if your site is configured properly, with a wildcard MX record for your > entire (sub)domain pointing to your site's mail server, and aliases or > mailer tables for mapping your users' login names to mailboxes, then > user@hostname will always be a working address. That requires a significant degree of cooperation among hosts at a site; all usernames on all machines must be known to the mail server. I don't think that's universally agreed-upon to be a "proper" policy, and I don't think MUAs should assume this to be true any more than you think networks should assume MUAs to be well-configured. > Your solution, leaving the site broken and changing Gnus' default > behaviour, may cause Gnus to construct illegal headers. I never said the site should be left "broken"; we can have well-configured networks *and* well-configured MUAs. I've only said that Gnus should not add Sender automatically. In what circumstances would that qualify as Gnus constructing illegal headers? > Your solution addresses a symptom of a problem and may create > another problem. My solution addresses the problem and prevents > other problems. My solution, fixing the site and leaving Gnus > alone, will never cause Gnus to create illegal headers. You're trying to make every MUA work on your site. I'm trying to make Gnus work on every site - including the ones that aren't configured the way you prefer. This means catering in part to the cases where user@hostname is not a working address, because Gnus is used in those cases sometimes. Since Sender is only for human consumption, and it is so difficult for software to guess a correct value, and the sender might want to conceal that information anyway, I think any attempt to add Sender automatically is wasted effort. paul