Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!TRANSARC.COM!Craig_Everhart
From: Craig_Everhart@TRANSARC.COM
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: Re: UUnet and munging headers.
Message-ID: <IaOviRb0BwwOQbc2ly@transarc.com>
Date: 5 Jun 90 14:03:09 GMT
References: <2777.AA2777@julie>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Lines: 28

> Excerpts from netnews.comp.mail.misc: 31-May-90 UUnet and munging
> headers. Michael Richardson@julie (5499)

> >An internetwork mail router must, by definition, transform addresses from
> >one of its networks to addresses that are acceptable to ALL hosts on
> >its destination network.

>   Not really. Only the final destination machine is going to pay
> attention to the From: field, so it need only be palitable to the
> final destination. Tell me, do "true" gateways pay attention to
> the To: field? Does _anyone_ after the first mail processor pay attention
> to the To: field? [None of my machines do. This is fortunate since
> I have a whole slew of personal aliases that Mush happily expands to
> multiple destinations.]

Yes, *true* (i.e. not broken) gateways transform all addresses into
those that are acceptable on the destination network (communication
regime, communication medium, communication conventions, call it what
you like).  Not only To: fields, but CC: fields, ReSent-To:,
ReSent-From:, ReSent-CC:, and (ugh) Return-receipt-to:.

This is how you allow those who receive a message (call it A) to send
their replies to all the folks who received message A.  Do you expect
them to have exactly the same set of Mush aliases that you do?

The RFCs are pretty clear on this point.  Do I need to find chapter-and-verse?

		Craig Everhart