Re: balsa-list digest, Vol 1 #938 - 1 msg

[Zachary Leslie <zleslie psd k12 co us>]

On Fri, 22 Feb 2002 12:01:03 -0500 (EST) 
balsa-list-request@gnome.org wrote:

> Send balsa-list mailing list submissions to
> 	balsa-list@gnome.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/balsa-list
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	balsa-list-request@gnome.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	balsa-list-admin@gnome.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of balsa-list digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. Re: Reply-To header (Brian Stafford)
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 08:48:04 +0000
> From: Brian Stafford <brian@stafford.uklinux.net>
> To: Balsa Mailing List <balsa-list@gnome.org>
> Subject: Re: Reply-To header
> 
> On Thu, 21 February 17:09 Thomas Maeder wrote:
> > Am 2002.02.21 10:31 schrieb(en) Brian Stafford:
> >> 
> >> Omitting To: Cc: and Bcc: headers from a message is entirely legal 
> >> according to RFC 2822.  A message is required only to provide originator 
> >> fields and Date:
> >> 
> >> So balsa does nothing wrong when To/Cc/Bcc are empty provided the SMTP 
> >> envelope lists the correct recipients.
> > 
> > Depends on your definition of "wrong".
> 
> Oh, for fucks sake.  Does *anybody* actually UNDERSTAND or listen to what I'm 
> trying to say?  The SMTP envelope, which determines message delivery, is 
> independent of the recipient headers in the message.  This is clear to any 
> fool who actually thinks about it, having read 2821 and 2822.
> 
> 
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> _______________________________________________
> balsa-list mailing list
> balsa-list@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/balsa-list
> 
> 
> End of balsa-list Digest

--------------------------------------
Zachary Leslie
zleslie@psd.k12.co.us
Poudre School District, Ft. Collins, CO