Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id PAA04150; Tue, 10 Oct 1995 15:14:45 -0400 Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (bulk_mailer v1.3); Tue, 10 Oct 1995 15:14:37 -0400 Received: from andrew.cmu.edu by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id PAA04122; Tue, 10 Oct 1995 15:14:35 -0400 Received: (from postman@localhost) by andrew.cmu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA14624 for drums@cs.utk.edu; Tue, 10 Oct 1995 15:14:32 -0400 Received: via switchmail; Tue, 10 Oct 1995 15:14:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from nifty.andrew.cmu.edu via qmail ID ; Tue, 10 Oct 1995 15:12:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: via niftymail; Tue, 10 Oct 1995 15:12:43 -0400 (EDT) Sender: Chris Newman Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 15:12:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Chris Newman Subject: Re: What's the Sender header for? To: drums@cs.utk.edu In-Reply-To: <199510101654.MAA21216@CS.UTK.EDU> References: <199510101654.MAA21216@CS.UTK.EDU> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: <813352363.20483.0@nifty.andrew.cmu.edu> > My mail program is configured based on a decision I've made once after > reviewing the situation. When I get a message with both "Sender:" and > "From:", but no "Reply-To:", and the two addresses are different, there > are two basic alternatives: I oppose Eric's proposed change to the following rule (RFC 822, section 4.4.4): > o The "Sender" field mailbox should NEVER be used > automatically, in a recipient's reply message. ----- Chris Newman , http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~nifty/ The worst thing about censorship is: [censored]