Hi, my "4409 to STD" mail on the rfc822 list got no reply, but
there was s short discussion on the SPF list. Here's the
actual state of a proposed fix for 4409 chapter 8.1:
: The MSA MAY add or replace the 'Sender' or 'Resent-Sender'
: field, if the identity of the sender is known and this is
: not given in the 'From' field.
: For a mail without 'Resent-From' field the MSA adds or
: replaces a 'Sender' field to reflect the known identity.
: For a mail with one 'Resent-From' field the MSA adds or
: replaces a 'Resent-Sender' field, if the 'Resent-From'
: field does not already reflect the known identity.
: For a mail with two or more 'Resent-From' fields the MSA
: verifies that the first (top-down) 'Resent-From' field
: reflects the known identity. Where that's not the case
: it replaces the first 'Resent-Sender' field before the
: second 'Resent-From' field, if that exists. Otherwise
: it adds a 'Resent-Sender' field reflecting the known
: identity before the first 'Resent-From' field.
: For a mail with 'Resent-Sender' field but no 'Resent-From'
: field the MSA MUST reject the syntactically invalid mail.
: The MSA MUST ensure that any address it places in a 'Sender'
: or 'Resent-Sender' field is in fact a valid mail address.
: Sites SHOULD NOT implement this option without the prior
: consent of affected users, and SHOULD reject mails from
: users affected by this option, if those users might not
: know that the local policy was changed to support it.
: For sites enforcing submission rights (6.1) this is less
: critical, if the added or replaced address in the 'Sender'
: or 'Resent-Sender' field reflects the MAIL FROM address.
: Please note that the MSA can also reject mails instead of
: adding or replacing a Sender or Resent-Sender address as
: oulined in section 6.3.
Is that good enough to bother the 2476/4409 authors with it ?