On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Frank Ellermann wrote:
From: user(_at_)church(_dot_)example, bishop(_at_)church(_dot_)example
Return-Path: verify(_at_)bills(_dot_)service(_dot_)example
Sender: verify(_at_)bills(_dot_)service(_dot_)example
Reply-To: user(_at_)church(_dot_)example
The Reply-To is optional. The Sender is incorrect as far as
mail standards are concerned, the real Sender was user(_at_)church
In this case, no - user(_at_)church was not directly involved in sending the
email
at all. They authorized service.example to send the email for them, so that
would not *have* to do it themselves.
If service.example really was a gateway - say a webmail interface
for church.example, then you would Return-Path to be church.example,
and the SPF record for church should reflect that.
--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flamis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.