Re: history of using a comment for display-name?

"Maynard Kang" <maynard@pobox.org.sg> Mon, 12 March 2001 06:15 UTC

Received: from cs.utk.edu (cs.utk.edu [160.36.56.56]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id BAA21414 for <drums-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 01:15:10 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id BAA08265; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 01:13:31 -0500 (EST)
Received: by cs.utk.edu (bulk_mailer v1.13); Mon, 12 Mar 2001 01:13:19 -0500
Received: by cs.utk.edu (cf v2.9s-UTK) id BAA08247; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 01:13:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from blake.i-email.net (marvin@localhost) by cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id BAA08233; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 01:13:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: from blake.i-email.net (203.126.116.232 -> blake.i-email.net) by cs.utk.edu (smtpshim v1.0); Mon, 12 Mar 2001 01:13:14 -0500
Received: from maynardibm (host50.icannmeeting.telstra.net [203.39.104.114]) by blake.i-email.net (Postfix) with SMTP id C7E77A890B; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 14:11:16 +0800 (SGT)
Message-ID: <00b801c0aabb$815c73e0$726827cb@maynardibm>
From: "Maynard Kang" <maynard@pobox.org.sg>
To: "Sam Roberts" <sroberts@uniserve.com>, "Dave Crocker" <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
Cc: <drums@cs.utk.edu>
References: <5.1.0.10.2.20010312074426.0262f020@brandenburg.com>
Subject: Re: history of using a comment for display-name?
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 14:13:05 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:drums-request@cs.utk.edu?Subject=unsubscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

>
> RFC822 did not adequately describe name <address> as the required form.
I
> believe that sendmail started the practise of doing address (name).
>

I think it did (section 6.1):
mailbox     =  addr-spec                    ; simple address
                 /  phrase route-addr            ; name & addr-spec
route-addr  =  "<" [route] addr-spec ">"

Additionally section 3.4.3 does state that comments must not be included
during protocol exchanges with mail servers.. and thus if I interpret it
correctly, sendmail is non-RFC822 compliant then.

maynard