Article View: comp.mail.headers
Article #299Re: rmail-reply-to-sender
From: Marshall Rose
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1986 04:19
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1986 04:19
10 lines
1005 bytes
1005 bytes
Mark - there is a difference between working correctly and working. Working correctly is to ignore sender and return-path. However this is not often working. In a perfect world with a diligent protocol police, we would only worry about working correctly. This proceeds from a false assumption: there is neither perfection nor diligence in the Internet. It is better to know that you can fall back on sender and/or return path in case you have to (when working on a poorly constructed message), than to just say "you can't reply to that". /mtr
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<874@brl-adm.ARPA>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!brl-adm!adm!mrose@nrtc-gremlin.arpaShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!brl-adm!adm!mrose@nrtc-gremlin.arpa From: mrose@nrtc-gremlin.arpa (Marshall Rose) Newsgroups: comp.mail.headers Subject: Re: rmail-reply-to-sender Message-ID: <874@brl-adm.ARPA> Date: Mon, 17-Nov-86 23:19:57 EST Article-I.D.: brl-adm.874 Posted: Mon Nov 17 23:19:57 1986 Date-Received: Tue, 18-Nov-86 03:26:42 EST Sender: news@brl-adm.ARPA Lines: 10