🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: fa.works
Article #127

Re: Mail headers

#127
From: ucbvaxworks
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1982 05:56
10 lines
772 bytes
>From JWALKER@Bbna Wed Mar 10 19:58:32 1982
Sure.  It makes perfect sense not to @i[require] the To: field,
for example, in applications where you are just filing the
message, rather than actually sending it.  This is a case,
however, where the spirit of the law demands some indication of
the auspices under which the mail is arriving even if the letter
of the law does not.  Note that RFC733 tried to make that the
case by requiring the From field.  Unfortunately in the big
public mailing list world, the From: information does not make
that identification and the To: field would.
Technical Details
Message-ID: <anews.Aucbvax.6490>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!works

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!works
From: ucbvax!works
Newsgroups: fa.works
Subject: Re: Mail headers
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1982 05:56:08 +0000
Message-ID: <anews.Aucbvax.6490>