Re: Technical requiremenets for Usenet messages

From	Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.php
Subject	Re: Technical requiremenets for Usenet messages
Date	2015-06-26 21:47 +0200
Organization	PointedEars Software (PES)
Message-ID	<3215185.dHzd1yV3My@PointedEars.de> (permalink)
References	(6 earlier) <1543927.4VZE17etc1@PointedEars.de> <mmct42$t6d$1@dont-email.me> <558C1BCC.7030706@arnowelzel.de> <mmi6e9$p1c$1@dont-email.me> <558D1098.50103@arnowelzel.de>

Show all headers | View raw

Arno Welzel wrote:

> Am 2015-06-26 um 02:31 schrieb Jerry Stuckle:
> [...]
>> Sorry, sucker - it is not required you have a valid email address - only
>> one which can be easily decoded.

Nonsense.

> See <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1036>:

| Obsoleted by: 5536, 5537  

> I don't see anything like "does not need to be the valid address, as
> long as humans can decode it somehow manually".

And indeed, there is not.

> Also the draft for the son of RFC1036 […]
> <http://www.chemie.fu-berlin.de/outerspace/netnews/son-of-1036.html#5.2>:

Long expired; not to be cited as reference material anyway:

| Internet Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months. 
| Internet Drafts may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents 
| at any time. It is not appropriate to use Internet Drafts as reference 
| material or to cite them other than as a "working draft" or "work in 
| progress".

And nowadays even the “Son of (RFC) 1036” is obsolete:

| Independent Submission                                        H. Spencer
| Request for Comments: 1849                                    SP Systems
| Obsoleted by: 5536, 5537                                      March 2010
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
| Category: Historic
| ISSN: 2070-1721
| 
| 
|           "Son of 1036": News Article Format and Transmission

> But I know what will follow now: You will explain that RFC1036 is quite
> old, the draft is also really old

Not only really old; they are *obsolete* and *expired*, respectively, which 
is quite a different thing.  (RFC 2616 – HTTP/1.1 – of 1999 is "really old" 
now, but implemented and still valid.)

But:

The (currently) Proposed Standard RFC 5536 of 2009 CE, which obsoletes RFCs 
1036 and 1849, and has not been obsoleted itself yet – so it for all intents 
and purposes it *is* *the* Internet standard on this –, makes no allowances 
in this matter:

| 3.1.2.  From
| 
|    The From header field is the same as that specified in Section 3.6.2
|    of [RFC5322], with the added restrictions detailed above in
|    Section 2.2.
| 
|    from            =  "From:" SP mailbox-list CRLF

The referred section 3.6.2 of RFC 5322 (“Internet Message Format”) says 
explicitly:

|  In all cases, the "From:" field SHOULD NOT contain any mailbox that
|  does not belong to the author(s) of the message.  See also section
|  3.6.3 for more information on forming the destination addresses for a
|  reply.

I have only read in some IETF document (could have been an RFC, maybe even 
on the Standards Track) that using the “invalid” TLD in some address header 
fields would be allowed.  I have forgotten which one (RFC 2606 is _not_ it), 
and I have not found it again yet.  Hints are appreciated.

-- 
PointedEars
Zend Certified PHP Engineer
Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

Thread

response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-10 06:59 -0700
  Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-10 10:18 -0400
  Re: response for server every second Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-10 16:41 +0200
    Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-10 11:55 -0400
      Re: response for server every second Allodoxaphobia <knock_yourself_out@example.net> - 2015-06-10 16:50 +0000
        Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-10 13:23 -0400
          Re: response for server every second Richard Yates <richard@yatesguitar.com> - 2015-06-10 10:37 -0700
            Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-10 14:27 -0400
    Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-10 23:38 -0700
    Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-11 00:14 -0700
      Re: response for server every second Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-11 12:09 +0200
        Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-11 04:16 -0700
          Re: response for server every second Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-11 14:37 +0200
            Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-11 06:20 -0700
              Re: response for server every second Matthew Carter <m@ahungry.com> - 2015-06-11 13:45 -0400
            Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-11 23:35 -0700
              Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-12 09:10 -0400
          Re: response for server every second Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2015-06-12 03:59 +0000
            [off topic nodejs advertisement] Was Re: response for server every second Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-15 16:08 +0200
              Performance of PHP vs. Node.js (was: [off topic nodejs advertisement]) "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-06-15 20:42 +0200
                Re: Performance of PHP vs. Node.js Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-16 00:20 +0200
                Re: Performance of PHP vs. Node.js "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-06-16 00:58 +0200
          Re: response for server every second gordonb.890nt@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2015-06-13 13:39 -0500
            Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-18 23:16 -0700
              Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-19 08:16 -0400
                Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-21 23:06 -0700
                Re: response for server every second "Peter H. Coffin" <hellsop@ninehells.com> - 2015-06-22 08:03 -0500
                Re: response for server every second Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 06:39 +0000
                Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-23 07:23 -0400
    Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-22 18:37 +0200
      Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-22 18:42 +0200
      Re: response for server every second Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-23 17:11 +0200
        Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-24 00:06 +0200
          Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-23 19:10 -0400
            Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-24 01:45 +0200
              Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-23 20:21 -0400
                Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-23 23:34 -0700
                Re: response for server every second bill <william@TechServSys.com> - 2015-06-24 06:58 -0400
                Re: response for server every second Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-25 17:18 +0200
                Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-25 20:31 -0400
                Technical requiremenets for Usenet messages (was: Re: response for server every second) Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-26 10:43 +0200
                Re: Technical requiremenets for Usenet messages Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-26 21:47 +0200
                Re: Technical requiremenets for Usenet messages Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-26 22:19 +0200
                Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-25 23:07 -0400
                Re: response for server every second Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-26 10:21 +0200
                Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-26 06:48 -0400
                Technical requirements for Usenet messages (was Re: response for server every second) Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-26 13:48 +0200
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages (was Re: response for server every second) Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-26 14:29 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-27 14:49 +0200
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-27 10:25 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-28 17:52 +0200
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-28 20:08 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages "Peter H. Coffin" <hellsop@ninehells.com> - 2015-06-27 22:14 -0500
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-28 17:54 +0200
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-28 20:10 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-30 09:54 +0200
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-30 08:45 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-30 16:20 +0200
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-30 15:00 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-07-06 13:36 +0200
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-07-06 11:56 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-06 18:54 +0100
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-07-06 16:54 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-07 00:00 +0100
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-07-06 22:08 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-07 07:24 +0100
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-07-07 10:41 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-07-09 22:52 -0700
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2015-07-02 03:07 +0000
                Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-26 21:13 +0200
            Re: response for server every second Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-24 09:52 +0100
              Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-24 09:21 -0400
                Re: response for server every second Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-24 18:48 +0100
                Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-24 20:55 +0200
                Re: response for server every second Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-24 20:55 +0100
                Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-24 15:21 -0400
                Re: response for server every second Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-24 20:35 +0100

csiph-web