Mark Sapiro writes: > That's a good point, even though current RFCs (RFC3464, RFC3834) say > that DSNs and and other automatic responses should go to the envelope > sender of the original message, not the Sender: address.
Of course, but that's a side issue. Sender is an originator, list post refers to the recipients. > I'm not sure I understand the following: > > >4. Recipients whose MUAs CC the sender can be automatically disabled, > > too! It's a bad joke, just ignore it. > If the issue would truly be resolved or at least mitigated by having > the Sender: be list-ad...@list.example.com instead of > list-boun...@list.example.com, that's a really easy change that > wouldn't have any unintended side effects. I think PHBs would definitely be more comfortable with that than with the "-bounces" variant. But I agree with Brad that *any* change can break things in mail, because it's all visible to and usable by Spamassassin and Procmail among others. ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
