From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Default for the envelope From in smtpmail.el Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 00:02:13 +0900 Message-ID: <87obmgtaq2.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <0xwr16rzz5.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83zk62c56n.fsf@gnu.org> <1usjbt9uzm.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87628pj727.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <19713425-C419-4A09-8D66-24717D761FE8@mit.edu> <2962EC94-1044-47A5-A111-F4CBACFDCA0B@mit.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1344783741 30653 80.91.229.3 (12 Aug 2012 15:02:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 15:02:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: chad Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Aug 12 17:02:22 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1T0ZgL-0007Y2-EO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 17:02:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34468 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T0ZgK-0006S6-KV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 11:02:20 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:51916) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T0ZgH-0006Ry-Rh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 11:02:19 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T0ZgG-0006Tg-RB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 11:02:17 -0400 Original-Received: from mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:59092) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T0ZgG-0006TU-H1; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 11:02:16 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 730F79708A0; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 00:02:13 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3471611F88A; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 00:02:13 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <2962EC94-1044-47A5-A111-F4CBACFDCA0B@mit.edu> X-Mailer: VM 8.0.12-devo-585 under 21.5 (beta31) "ginger" b4715fcbe001 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 130.158.97.224 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:152451 Archived-At: chad writes: > I was hoping to clarify for Stephen that you guys aren't talking > about the same cases (at least, it seemed to me that you weren't). That's true. AFAICT I was talking about a superset of the cases that Glenn was, and that's important. My basic point is that there are many different cases, and that Emacs (when acting as an MTA, which is more or less equivalent to speaking SMTP as it does via smtpmail.el) should try to make them all look the same to users. That means that smtpmail.el should *default* to using the logged-in user's mailbox for the envelope sender. It is true that there are fascist MTAs out there that will insist that Sender and envelope sender be consistent (I doubt that From matters if Sender is specified, but not very strongly ... Microsoft's sins in the area of polluting the mail system are varied and often vicious). As long as they accept Sender == envelope sender, that's what I would recommend. Many, perhaps most, users don't know anything about Sender, and maybe Exchange is so broken that the rule is From == envelope sender. So what? As I wrote earlier, if the user is stuck with such a system and chooses to change the From address, he'd better know what he's doing. Among other things, he may be violating the rules of his network by spoofing the envelope sender (eg, last time I checked this was true for mine), or even by spoofing the From address.