gnu-arch-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging


From: Miles Bader
Subject: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: the dangers of no reply-to munging
Date: 27 Aug 2003 14:16:35 +0900

Robert Collins <address@hidden> writes:
> > However, the failure mode here is benign -- at worst, duplicate
> > copies get sent (if someone follows up to a copy of the message
> > added by the MLM for a non-subscribed mailing list, but the
> > recipient headers also included a subscribed mailing list).
> 
> It's not benign: if the recipient is on one list of two, and the sender
> of the reply is one the other, and finally, the list the recipient is on
> doesn't allow un-subscribed posters.. the recipient won't get the mail
> they otherwise would have.

I can't see how that would happen except in the case where the original
sender adds M-F-T himself; since I used the weasel-word `intelligently'
I'll just modify my previous rule, to be more so:   :-)

  Basically M-F-T should omit the sender if he's on _any_ of the mailing
  lists to which the message was sent, as long they're `public' lists.

In the case where the MLMs add the M-F-T header, it all seems to work:

   Assume both MLMs add M-F-T accordingly, and the original message (from
   `the recipient', subscribed to list1) says:

      From: person1
      To: list1, list2

   Then the `sender of the reply' above (subscribed to list2) will get this:

      From: person1
      To: list1, list2
      M-F-T: list1, list2, person1

   Because he received it through list2, which sees that person1 isn't
   subscribed when adding the M-F-T header.  Of course if he then
   replies, his message will be rejected by list1 -- but there's
   nothing you can do about that in any case, and person1 will still
   get a copy.

Of course if the MLMs are adding the header, and the receiver does
duplicate-removal, you run into the issue of `which copy of the headers
did I receive' -- but even if you receive a copy not sent through a
list, the failure mode seems benign in that you simply don't get a
M-F-T header, so any followup you send will default to being over-inclusive.

-Miles
-- 
Saa, shall we dance?  (from a dance-class advertisement)




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]