Re: More questions on smail configuration for SMTP/PPP
- To: email@example.com (Ian Jackson)
- Cc: Dirk.Eddelbuettel@qed.econ.queensu.ca, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, debian-user@Pixar.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
- Subject: Re: More questions on smail configuration for SMTP/PPP
- From: Carl V Streeter <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sat, 10 Feb 1996 14:42:36 -0600 (CST)
- Message-id: <[🔎] 199602102042.OAA05402@hp-47.cae.wisc.edu>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] m0tlJ9E-0002c0C@chiark.chu.cam.ac.uk> from "Ian Jackson" at Feb 10, 96 05:31:00 pm
Ian Jackson writes:
> This won't set the return path and is therefore broken.
I think I'm missing something fundamental, here. Isn't the return-path
supposed to be set by the last transport agent that delivers the message?
If so, then why won't rewriting the From field make that happy? (or does it
use the received data or something else?)
Is there an RFC (later than 822) that I should be looking at?
Carl Streeter | "I'll forgive even GNU emacs as long
email@example.com | as gcc is available" --Linus Torvalds
Just another Perl hacker | "Etiquette-wise, there is no proper time
Ask me about Debian/GNU Linux. | to use the phrase 'It sucks.'" --Dogbert