ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Asrg] More e-mail oddities; SPF thoughts

2006-02-05 13:05:52


Danny Angus wrote:
I've just realized that the .forward capability in sendmail operates
differently than my MUA, thunderbird, does when I manually forward..

Two different rules for two different roles, an MTA is actually re-routing
the original message the MUA is forwarding the content of the message in a
new message.
This is how it is supposed to work, whether or not it is a wholly Good
Thing is another matter.


To drive your point home even further, and with crushingly boring detail:

The .forward mechanism is a cooperative action between the recipient specified in the SMTP RCPT-TO envelope address and that recipient's email service delivery agent (MDA). It's effect is to re-submit exactly the same message, with one significant difference: There is a new SMTP RCPT-TO address. (I am ignoring whether there are additional Received headers, because they do not matter for this discussion.) Even though the .forward mechanism uses information created by the recipient, it really is best to view it as an enhancement to the email transfer infrastructure.

By contrast, the use of a Forward command in an MUA creates a brand new user message and adds the previous message to its body. To stress the key point: It is entirely a user-level activity. The email infrastructure has nothing to do with it, other than the usual process of transferring a new message. The MUA can add the forwarded message as in-line text, as part of a single, unified message body, or it can add it as an attachment (the message/rfc822, as mentioned earlier.)

A message that is re-routed by .forward is FROM the original author. A message re-routed by an MUA is FROM the user of that MUA.

The "redirect" or "resend" MUA command attempts to perform something akin to the action of the .forward function, but the results usually are different and variable. The concept of redirect is, really, to re-assign the message to an alternate recipient. Therefore, the original FROM is preserved -- rather than having the FROM address be that of the recipient doing the redirecting, even though the user doing the re-directing might add a bunch to the message body, such as instructions for how the new recipient is to deal with the message. (The FROM field often shows some commentary text to indicate who did the redirecting. There also are some resent-* header fields added.)

d/
--

Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
<http://bbiw.net>

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg