Text File

Aucbvax.6460 fa.works utcsrgv!utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!works Fri Mar 12 11:24:58 1982 Re: Mail headers >From COMSAT.SoftArts@Mit-Multics Thu Mar 11 19:52:30 1982 Local: Jan Walker <JWALKER@BBNA>,WorkS at Mit-Ai Via: Mit-Ai; 11 Mar 82 22:10-EDT Via: Brl-Bmd; 11 Mar 82 22:21-EDT

Mail-From: BRL Received-Date: 9-Mar-82 1801-EST Date: 8 Mar 1982 19:39:34-PST From: research!bart at Ucb-C70 Via: Mit-Ai; 9 Mar 82 17:32-EDT Brl-Bmd; 9 Mar 82 17:52-EDT

This is really a message for header-people, but the problem is NOT with the sender not having a TO field. The "to" field bears not the slightest relationship except by pure coincidence with the destinee (how's that for a word?). It is the responsibility of your mail server to mark the letter with the intended recipient before mixing it in your mailbox with other mail for other recipients. If you want to know what mailing list it was intended for, the "to" field is nice as a comment, but that is about it.

Sorry about the flaming, but this has been something I have been complaining about for years. At least (as has been pointed out in another reply) RFC-733 recognizes the uselessness of the "to" field once a letter has been sent.

----------------------------------------------------------------- gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> of http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/

This Usenet Oldnews Archive article may be copied and distributed freely, provided:

1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles.

2. The following notice remains appended to each copy:

The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996 Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.