home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!tymix!cirrus!dhesi
- From: dhesi@cirrus.com (Rahul Dhesi)
- Newsgroups: comp.mail.headers
- Subject: Re: Return-Path or From: ?
- Message-ID: <1992Jul31.173909.3072@cirrus.com>
- Date: 31 Jul 92 17:39:09 GMT
- References: <1992Jul27.024211.20761@ryptyde.cts.com> <MLoqr*E11@senga.ka.sub.org>
- Sender: news@cirrus.com
- Organization: Cirrus Logic Inc, Fremont, CA
- Lines: 20
-
- There was a period of time long ago during which I found that one or
- two intermediate UUCP sites were mangling From: headers quite badly.
- During that period of time, I found it convenient to tell MH to send
- replies to the return-path field.
-
- Even today, there are a few sites that will change a fully-qualified
- domain-form From: address into bang-path form. Other sites will
- happily prepend their name to this bang-path. Yet others *won't*. The
- final result is what looks like a complete bang-path, but it has some
- names missing in the middle. At that point the mail bounces with
- "unknown UUCP host". (And we started with a nice FQDN, which is
- supposed to be Immutable and Always Replyable.)
-
- The reply-path seems to be usually much better behaved.
-
- Fortunately I haven't found it necessary lately to use the reply-path
- for replies, but I can see why some people might.
- --
- Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@cirrus.com>
- also: dhesi@rahul.net
-