From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Wed Jun 05 2002 - 05:54:28 CDT
In <Pine.LNX.4.10.10206041258230.31333-100000@spock.peak.org> John Stanley <stanley@peak.org> writes:
> Be warned, however, that some injecting agents which are unable
> to detect that the address belongs to the poster may choose to
> insert a Sender-header (6.2) or some entry in an Injector-Info-
> header (6.19) which discloses some valid address for the poster.
>This is still unacceptable. "...agents which are unable to detect that the
>address belongs to the poster..." do not meet the criteria necessary for
>insertion of the Sender header. The Sender definition says that that
>header specifies the mailbox IF that entity is different than that in the
>difference". Any injecting agent which acts this way is BROKEN and should
>be explicitely prohibited, not explicitely allowed.
An injecting agent that inserts a Sender in that way is possibly broken
(and certainly discouraged in 8.2.2). But one that inserts the same
information in an Injector-Info is not broken. It may be considered to be
anti-social, and for that reason there is a NOTE in 6.19.1 advising ISPs
to consider their responsibilities carefully.
Anyway, I have changed the reference "(6.2)" to "(but see 8.2.2)" to make
sure that readers of the document get to see all the texts relevant to
this issue.
-- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5