Re: [Gnus 5.2.14] message-make-sender

[morioka@jaist.ac.jp (守岡 知彦 / MORIOKA Tomohiko)]

>>>>> In <x7g283u4ow.fsf@unilab.dfci.harvard.edu> 
>>>>>	Richard Pieri <ratinox@unilab.dfci.harvard.edu> wrote:

Richard> >>>>> "aj" == =?ISO-2022-JP?Q?=1B$B<morioka@jaist ac jp
Richard> >>>>> <morioka@jaist.ac.jp> writes:

aj> Sender field must include a mail reachable real address.

Richard> Nope.  From RFC822:

(snip)

Richard> [For instance, a mailing list manager will set the Sender:
Richard> field because it is responsible for sending messages but it
Richard> does not originate messages. --Rat]

(snip)

Richard>         The Sender mailbox specification includes a word
Richard>         sequence which must correspond to a specific agent
Richard>         (i.e., a human user or a computer program) rather
Richard>         than a standard address.  This indicates the
Richard>         expectation that the field will identify the single
Richard>         agent (person, system, or process) responsible for
Richard>         sending the mail and not simply include the name of a
Richard>         mailbox from which the mail was sent.  For example in
Richard>         the case of a shared login name, the name, by itself,
Richard>         would not be adequate. The local-part address unit,
Richard>         which refers to this agent, is expected to be a
Richard>         computer system term, and not (for example) a
Richard>         generalized person reference which can be used
Richard>         outside the network text message context.

Richard> [In fact, not only does Sender: not need to contain a valid
Richard> Internet mail address, it generally should not contain
Richard> one. --Rat]

  Thanks for your kind answer. Please confirm again.

  In my Emacs, (system-name) returns "is28e1s91", so message.el adds

	Sender: morioka@is28e1s91

Of course, it is not valid mail address. I think Sender field is to
identify the agent responsible for sending message, and it seems not
enough to identify the agent.

  By the way, (system-name) should return FQDM?


Richard> No, that is the Reply-To: header.

  My from field is valid, so I does have such kind of problem.

  My question is

	Sender: morioka@is28e1s91

is valid or not.

  Thanks,
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Morioka Tomohiko <morioka@jaist.ac.jp>
(`Morioka' is my family name, `Tomohiko' is my personal name.)
---------------- I protest continuation of Chinese nuclear testing.---