Re: content-disposition notification with new nmh

On Tue, 15 May 2012 22:36:52 -0400, Ken Hornstein writes:
>>which part, answering an inbound one or sending mail with an MDN request?
>>i just checked, and responding to an inbound request works fine here...
>
>Alex, you're still on an older version of nmh, right?  That's the
>reason it works for you; 

thanks for the clarification, that's it.

>nmh from 1.5 onward rejects drafts that
>lack a From: header, and the message that exmh composes for the
>Disposition-Notification doesn't have one (I suggested a few solutions
>to this a few days ago when Kevin brought it up).

i've just dug through these mails, but i see one problem with
the suggested fixes: the standard says that the MDN must
be sent with the empty return-path = envelope from "<>".

(see https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3798 section 3, the paragraph 
about "envelope sender")

as far as i can tell there is no way to indicate that one wants a
null return path from within a From: header; using "From: <>" is not valid
(see https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322 sections 3.4 and 3.4.1, addr-spec
mustn't be empty).

how about having post/spost use the absence of a From: to mean "send this
with empty envelope sender"?

regards
az


-- 
Alexander Zangerl + GnuPG Keys 0x42BD645D or 0x5B586291 + http://snafu.priv.at/
Q. why do you get when you cross an elephant and a grape?
A. sin(theta)     Note: assumes |elephant|==|grape|==1

_______________________________________________
Exmh-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/exmh-users

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iF4EAREIAAYFAk+1m/UACgkQ+bKELRvb2Dx6jwD+OahDY2HrA8JsZQe1ot4LpZyT
e5+Fxv5LdsvTygQ7Q7MBAKD/Je4c8xjPRymlEqugK/SVPZXmXxTc2XxmRWLTvU/d
=WbwT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----