🚀 go-pugleaf

gnat@kauri.vuw.ac.nz (Nathan Torkington) writes:

> Craig (kilroy ...) writes:
> 
> > BTW, you also said something about how Extremely Wicked it is that Massey's
> > news system doesn't conform to all the relevant guidelines. Quote me a single
> > (current) RFC that says that any message emitted from Massey is
> > non-compliant.
> 
> RFC 1036 (Usenet messages):
> 
> |2.1.1.  From
> |
> |    The "From" line contains the electronic mailing address of the
> |    person who sent the message, in the Internet syntax
> 
> RFC 822 (Internet text messages):
> 
> |6.2.2
> |	[...]
> |        When a message crosses a domain boundary, all  addresses  must
> |        be  specified  in  the  full format, ending with the top-level
> |        name-domain in the right-most field.  It is the responsibility
> |        of  mail  forwarding services to ensure that addresses conform
> |        with this requirement.  In the case of abbreviated  addresses,
> |        the  relaying  service must make the necessary expansions.

Nice try Nat, but in the case of the section from RFC1036 it's easily argued
that news@massey... *is* the person who sent the message (after all, at some
point in the news process Massey's system thinks it is, hence the from line).
And I'm still trying to figure out the relevance of the RFC822 quote. It's
entirely possible there isn't any.

So all we've established is what I said in the first place. Massey's articles
may be inconvenient and annoying, but they're hardly illegal (in the Usenet
sense).

						- k
-- 
Craig Harding            kilroy@acme.gen.nz             ACME BBS +64 6 3551342
"Jub'er lbh pnyyvat n obmb?"