On 2017-02-12, at 15:56, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:

> I'm fully on board with "Subscription=Open,Confirm" if it makes email safer 
> in general. What frosts me is that the "D" of WAD misses the mark and is 
> actually counterproductive. I'm told (!) that we have implemented what we 
> lovingly call 'industry best practice' in quarantining any email with no 
> sender specified. It does not matter what the sender field contains; it just 
> cannot be blank. So send the confirmation note with something--anything--in 
> that field, and all will be well.
> 
> I cannot imagine any technical or policy reason for leaving that field blank. 
> It has Omission written all over it. This problem affects multiple shops. If 
> should be fixed at the source.  
>  
I see that, as you said, messages posted to IBM-MAIN have "Sender:"; 
confirmation
requests lack it.  Can you or your email tech retrieve *just*one* confirmation
request from quarantine so you can confirm, they you'll be home free?

(TSO-REXX is the same way.)

-- gil

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to