procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: formail reply headers

1996-09-09 01:47:16
On Friday 6 September 96, at 22 h 52, the keyboard of 
dattier(_at_)wwa(_dot_)com 
(David W. Tamkin) wrote:

Alan Stebbens posted the formail -r[t] rank bar graph from version 3.11pre4.
It might be easier to follow as a top-to-bottom listing (and again, Tom
Zeltwanger appears to be using one of the older versions where From_ was
mistakenly overpromoted).  These are the rankings in version 3.11pre4:

Always use 'formail -rt' and never 'formail -r'. Because such precedence 
(Sender over From) is an important violation of RFC 822. There is one 
canonical order, described in the RFC and nothing else should be used, 
like fuzzy ranking or, worse, reordering. This is a serious problem with 
formail.

The proper order is:

Reply-To
  else
From
  else
Sender
  else
<error>

I quote the RFC:

   4.4.4.  AUTOMATIC USE OF FROM / SENDER / REPLY-TO

        For systems which automatically  generate  address  lists  for
        replies to messages, the following recommendations are made:

            o   The "Sender" field mailbox should be sent  notices  of
                any  problems in transport or delivery of the original
                messages.  If there is no  "Sender"  field,  then  the
                "From" field mailbox should be used.

            o   The  "Sender"  field  mailbox  should  NEVER  be  used
                automatically, in a recipient's reply message.

            o   If the "Reply-To" field exists, then the reply  should
                go to the addresses indicated in that field and not to
                the address(es) indicated in the "From" field.

            o   If there is a "From" field, but no  "Reply-To"  field,
                the  reply should be sent to the address(es) indicated
                in the "From" field.

        Sometimes, a recipient may actually wish to  communicate  with
        the  person  that  initiated  the  message  transfer.  In such
        cases, it is reasonable to use the "Sender" address.

        This recommendation is intended  only  for  automated  use  of
        originator-fields  and is not intended to suggest that replies
        may not also be sent to other recipients of messages.   It  is
        up  to  the  respective  mail-handling programs to decide what
        additional facilities will be provided.

        Examples are provided in Appendix A.

Stephane Bortzmeyer           Institut Pasteur
bortzmeyer(_at_)pasteur(_dot_)fr         Service d'Informatique Scientifique
                              Paris, France
+33 1 40 61 34 62

http://web.cnam.fr/personnes/bortzmeyer/home_page.dom

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>