pt@geovision.uucp (Paul Tomblin) (05/28/90)
First, a bit of background. Our non-computer oriented people and managers were using an office automation system called Rx. When the developers went out of business (XIOS), we decided to switch them to unix mail using ELM (because they couldn't be expected to learn any other mail system). Some of the features of Rx mail were Confidential mail (were they couldn't print or forward this mail), and registered mail. I've got them to use [encode] and [clear] for confidential mail (it's good enough, because none of them are going to TRY and subvert it), so now I've been asked to implement a registered mail system for ELM. My question to the net, is: Has it been done before? If not, would my implementation get into ELM 2.4? What I'm planning is a new header, like X-Registered, and a hack to the message reading bit that check for this header && the unread flag, and sends a message to the sender along the lines of "Your message so-and-so, with Subject so-and-so, has been read by so-and-so". Anybody have any opinions on this? Remember, we need it for users who are too naive to get out of ELM and do anything to subvert this system, and besides, they dont WANT to subvert it. -- Paul Tomblin nrcaer!cognos!geovision!beet!pt or uunet!geovision!beet!pt Note: Don't use the reply path to mail to me from other sites. It'll bounce. A separate Quebec will be an Extinct Society. -- An anglophone Quebecer (me) Disclaimer: My employer probably does not agree with my opinions. Me neither.
rls@svcs1.UUCP (Bob Strait) (05/31/90)
>My question to the net, is: Has it been done before? If not, >would my implementation get into ELM 2.4? > >What I'm planning is a new header, like X-Registered, and a hack >to the message reading bit that check for this header && the >unread flag, and sends a message to the sender along the lines of >"Your message so-and-so, with Subject so-and-so, has been read by >so-and-so". > Yes, it's been done. At least one version of System V's 'mailx' that I'm aware of supports almost exactly the functionality you describe. How the implementation would graft into ELM I couldn't guess. But, if you get it done, I'd sure like to have the patch, whether Weinstein & Co. buy it or not. Put me down for a copy. Of course, this implementation implies that both the sending and receiving parties are running MUA's that support the new header. Bubba