On 30 Oct 2002, Perry E. Metzger wrote: > Dave Crocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Wednesday, October 30, 2002, 1:38:54 PM, you wrote: > > Perry> As I use Return-Path: headers to filter my mail, this has gotten > > Perry> annoying, Yes, I can indeed kludge around it, but is there a > > Perry> particular reason for this being done? > > > > Using return-path is a bit like paying attention to what mailbox a postal > > letter is dropped into. > > > > looking for ietf-announce in the recipient list works better. > > The recipient list is a pretty poor way to deal with things when you > get mail sent to multiple lists you're on, and often the To: line ends > up with nothing at all. The Return-Path: is generally the surest way > to know which of the lists each of the messages was sent to. I've > tried lots of things over the years, and Return-Path: is what works > the best. I'm on a few hundred mailing lists so the matter is somewhat > important to me.
On the other hand, when someone replies to you on most mailing-lists (To: you, Cc: m-l), at least _I_ don't want those hundreds of messages in my inbox, rather in the respective folders (both direct mail and the mailing-list version with Return-Path:). The approach looks suitable if one is relatively passive on the mailing lists. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords
