[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       majordomo-workers
Subject:    Re: Use of the "Sender:" header
From:       Omar Thameen <omar () clifford ! inch ! com>
Date:       2000-12-14 23:10:00
[Download RAW message or body]

What I was really thinking of doing was separating the envelope
address from the "Sender" address so I could have non-delivery
notifications go to the envelope (for piping through a program
or easy filtering) while preserving the "Sender" as owner-listname.
To change the envelope, I just need to change $mailer in the
majordomo.cf file, right?

Could you elaborate on why removing the sender breaks the RFC?
The RFCs seemed pretty ambiguous on the function of "Sender",
one stating that it's the agent that submitted the message to
the network, and another stating that it should be a human.

I realize that these 2 conditions aren't mutually exclusive since the
owner- address is supposed to be a person (don't know the RFC offhand).
I could see where the agent would be Mj, but I could also see where the
original author could be construed as submitting the message.  In the
latter case, I envision the function of "Sender" to be clarification that,
for example, user@work_address.com sent the message, but changed the
"From:" line to be user@home_address.com.

Omar

On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 01:44:29PM -0600, Dan Liston wrote:
> You are basically in control of your list service.  If your outlook
> users are getting confused by a header, you can A) educate them, B)
> suggest they use a different client, or C) break the RFC to appease
> them.
> 
> Easiest solution? (C)!
> 
> In the resend script, you can comment out the line 
> 	print OUT "Sender: $sender\n"; 
> In majordomo-1.94.5 this is line 749.
> 
> Most people that subscribe to a list recognize there will be a 
> difference in the way a message from that list looks.  They will
> even use that difference as a quick way to identify those 
> messages or filter them into specific folders.  Removing the
> "Sender: " header has not been seen as detrimental for others
> using the same trick.  The choice is yours.
> 
> Dan Liston
> 
> Omar Thameen wrote:
> > 
> > What's the de facto standard for the use of the "Sender:" header?
> > 
> > I'm asking because Majordomo 1.94.4 sets the "Sender:" and the envelope
> > address to the same value as set in the list configuration file (typically
> > owner-listname@domain.com).  I thought nothing of this until I was made
> > aware that Outlook (not Outlook Express) reports that the message is
> > from the field in the Sender: header when you open an email message in
> > a separate window (i.e., double-clicking on the summary line).
> > 
> > Some list members fine it confusing to see what normally is a
> > "behind-the-scenes" email address.  I was ready to think that Microsoft
> > was displaying an inappropriate header and making my life difficult,
> > but in the RFC's, I found (using the useful informational RFC
> > http://www.dsv.su.se/~jpalme/ietf/mail-headers/mail-headers.html ):
> > 
> > RFC822, 4.2.2
> >         This field contains the authenticated identity  of  the  AGENT
> >         (person,  system  or  process)  that sends the message.
> > 
> >         [...]
> >         Since the critical function served by the  "Sender"  field  is
> >         identification  of  the agent responsible for sending mail and
> >         since computer programs cannot be held accountable  for  their
> >         behavior, it is strongly recommended that when a computer pro-
> >         gram generates a message, the HUMAN  who  is  responsible  for
> >         that program be referenced as part of the "Sender" field mail-
> >         box specification.
> > 
> > RFC1036, 2.2.2
> >     This field is present only if the submitter manually enters a "From"
> >     line.  It is intended to record the entity responsible for
> >     submitting the message to the network.  It should be verified by the
> >     software at the submitting host.
> > 
> > I'm guessing that Mj probably interpreted the MLM to be the AGENT, and I
> > know that the owner-listname address is supposed to be a human, so the
> > defaults for Mj are reasonable.  However, I've been trying to change
> > the envelope address to something like "bounces-listname@domain.com" as a
> > way to filter out NDN's and auto-unsubscribe the invalid addresses while
> > maintaining owner-listname as a way to reach a person.  Unfortunately,
> > this had the effect of changing the "Sender" as well and producing a
> > less palatable displayed address in Outlook.
> > 
> > The other stipulations for the "Sender" field seem to indicate that the
> > originating email address would be equally appropriate, as this would
> > satisfy the condition of being a HUMAN and the entity that submitted
> > the message to the network.
> > 
> > Thus, I'm wondering if there are any real consequences to modifying Mj
> > to exclude the "Sender" or to use the "From:" address.  Any opinions?
> > 
> > Omar

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]