Errors-to: owner-drums@CS.UTK.EDU
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 95 21:08:42 -0500
From: Eric Norman <ejnorman@macc.wisc.edu>
Reply-To: drums%cs.utk.edu@CS.UTK.EDU
Message-Id: <9509150208.AA01937@dogie.macc.wisc.edu>
To: drums@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject: From: the beginning

> Perhaps we could nail down the existing headers now with the understanding
> that people will work on solving the mailing list problem later, and that

In order to start nailing, let's make sure we have the simple ones
nailed down.  Everyone doubtless agrees that the From: header
identifies the author(s) of the message.  Is there anyone who also thinks:

(1) that it also identifies the host the message was created on?
(2) that it also identifies the host the author's UA runs on?
(3) that it also identifies the host with the first MTA to get the message?
(4) anything else like that?

Assuming the answer is "no", what else could it mean other that what
others have proposed as Personal-Reply-To;?

But there's more.  I don't think the From: address should mean just any
old address by which the author can be reached (there are often many);
I think it sould reflect the address by which the author wishes to be known
in the external world.

Take this message as an example of a very common situation.  It is being
compossed on and originally sent from the host dogie.macc.wisc.edu, but the
From: header is going to say just ejnorman@macc.wisc.edu; since that's the
address I want external folks to use.

Perhaps the reaction is, "Yeah, yeah, everyone here knows that".  If so,
good, then we seem to have it nailed down.  However, since our charter is
to clarify what extant headers mean, it needs to be clearly and explicitly
stated so that the "amateurs" know it too.

Does this have any consequences as far as Reply-To: is concerned?  It looks
like it does.  It means that it is NOT APPROPRIATE to use Reply-To: to
handle the case mentioned above.  This is something that needs to be
clearly stated also.  I.e. there needs to be a statement not only about
what Reply-To: means, but also a statement about what it can't be used
for.  In other words, I would like to see a statement that Reply-To: MUST
NOT be used for masquerading (or whatever you want to call it); that's
what the From: header is for..

Eric (who usually signs just "Eric", but that's been usurped) Norman