jordan@ucb-arpa.ARPA (Jordan Hayes) (02/18/86)
I'm all for exploders that remove their real From: address and make it a Really-From: header, so replying goes to the list and not the sender ... then, the exploder has to look for itself in the From: field and forward to the owner ... is this so hard or am I kidding myself? /jordan
galvin@udel-dewey.ARPA (James M Galvin) (02/18/86)
> I'm all for exploders that remove their real From: address and make it > a Really-From: header, so replying goes to the list and not the > sender I don't agree. I'm all for mail systems that require a From: field and reject mail without it. Actually, what you are suggesting is available internally from MMDF. BRL wrote a list processor which changes the From: field as it is known to the MTA's to "list-request". This means the actual message itself is not altered, but as the message is passed from host to host, each host is told that the From: address is "list-request". Now, if we could teach the remaining mail systems to keep this information around instead of looking in the message for it the world would be a better place. The next step is to teach mail user agents about a "Reply-To:" field. If they would let you insert one then individuals could specify to keep the discussion on the mailing list, not in his/her personal mailbox. Note mine. Time to be quiet. I am beginning to sound religious. Jim
jordan@ucb-arpa.ARPA (Jordan Hayes) (02/19/86)
From galvin@dewey.udel.EDU Tue Feb 18 06:31:43 1986
The next step is to teach mail user agents about a "Reply-To:"
field. If they would let you insert one then individuals could
specify to keep the discussion on the mailing list, not in
his/her personal mailbox. Note mine.
Also note that you not only sent the list a copy, but me a personal one
as well, even though I'm on the list. Not a big deal on the internet,
but a very big deal in csnet/phonenet or UUCP world (even mailnet).
Hmmm ... you're correct about needing smarter user agents, but I think
that the concept of "mailing list" means that if you have something
to add, you should add to it, and not reply directly. So, making the
exploder claim responsibility and adding a "Reply-To:" field makes
dumb UAs send replys to the list, which is what it should do.
The problem you run into is error detection. If there is an error
somewhere down the line, mailer-daemons "return to sender" which now is
the entire list. This is bad. So, the exploder need only check for
itself in the From: field, and forward to the list maintainer.
I sorta like the idea that rn has about having an {r,R} reply to the
sender, and a {f,F} reply to the list. Not both.
/jordan