Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Jordan Brown]

On 1/30/2018 6:22 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 01/30/2018 04:53 PM, Jordan Brown wrote:
>> (that is, first_strip_reply_to=No, reply_goes_to_list=This List)
>>
>> Then if user A sends a message to the list without a Reply-To, replies
>> will go to the list, but if user B sends a message to the list with
>> "Reply-To: " replies will go to user B.
>
> No.  In the User A case messages from the list will have a Reply-To with
> the list address and replies (ignoring the pathological recent
> Thunderbird) will go to the list as you say, but in the User B case,
> messages from the list will have a Reply-To with both User B's address
> and the list address and replies will go to both User B and the list.
>
> Of course, not all MUA's behave exactly the same with reply in cases
> where there are multiple addresses in Reply-To: but reasonable ones at
> least will address the reply to all the Reply-To: addresses.
>

Thanks for the correction.

(Then I don't know why people are unhappy when Reply-To == From.)


--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Mark Sapiro]

On 01/30/2018 06:46 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote:
> 
> I wonder if that hints at another option when munging the From: (i.e.
> for DMARC reason).  Add the author (read: the original From:) as a
> Reply-To and set the mailing list as From:.  That would provide the
> original author information that many people want and (correctly)
> complain that From: munging hides.


The Munge From DMARC mitigations do essentially that. The message From:
Joe User  gets sent From: Joe User via Listname
 and has the original From: in either Reply-To: or
Cc: depending on some settings according to these goals.

> # MAS: We need to do some things with the original From: if we've munged
> # it for DMARC mitigation.  We have goals for this process which are
> # not completely compatible, so we do the best we can.  Our goals are:
> # 1) as long as the list is not anonymous, the original From: address
> #should be obviously exposed, i.e. not just in a header that MUAs
> #don't display.
> # 2) the original From: address should not be in a comment or display
> #name in the new From: because it is claimed that multiple domains
> #in any fields in From: are indicative of spamminess.  This means
> #it should be in Reply-To: or Cc:.
> # 3) the behavior of an MUA doing a 'reply' or 'reply all' should be
> #consistent regardless of whether or not the From: is munged.
> # Goal 3) implies sometimes the original From: should be in Reply-To:
> # and sometimes in Cc:, and even so, this goal won't be achieved in
> # all cases with all MUAs.  In cases of conflict, the above ordering of
> # goals is priority order.


-- 
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users]

On 01/30/2018 07:22 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
No.  In the User A case messages from the list will have a Reply-To 
with the list address and replies (ignoring the pathological recent 
Thunderbird) will go to the list as you say, but in the User B case, 
messages from the list will have a Reply-To with both User B's address 
and the list address and replies will go to both User B and the list.


Thank you for the confirmation Mark.  That's what I thought should 
happen in the B case.


Of course, not all MUA's behave exactly the same with reply in cases 
where there are multiple addresses in Reply-To: but reasonable ones at 
least will address the reply to all the Reply-To: addresses.


I wonder if that hints at another option when munging the From: (i.e. 
for DMARC reason).  Add the author (read: the original From:) as a 
Reply-To and set the mailing list as From:.  That would provide the 
original author information that many people want and (correctly) 
complain that From: munging hides.


I think you'd have to have the discussion mailing list listed in the 
From: and Reply-To: in addition to the original author (From:).




--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users]

On 01/30/2018 05:53 PM, Jordan Brown wrote:
[ Feh.  My biggest MUA<->ML nuisance is that I don't have a way to force 
replies to use the custom From address that I use for that mailing list.


I'm assuming that you're talking about the address that address that 
direct replies go to.


My solution is to use a custom From: address (and occasionally to 
manually set the Reply-To: address) according to where I want the 
message (reply) to go to.


Yes, I use MANY different email addresses for this and similar reasons.


Grant, sorry for the dup. ]


I understand why.  I don't hold my preference against you or others.


If your Mailman is configured so:

…

(that is, first_strip_reply_to=No, reply_goes_to_list=This List)

Then if user A sends a message to the list without a Reply-To, replies 
will go to the list, but if user B sends a message to the list with 
"Reply-To: " replies will go to user B.


Okay.  I think I'm starting to see the problem that you're alluding to.

It's not so much that people set a Reply-To: in their MUA in and of 
itself.  It's the interaction of their settings in relation to MLMs 
configured like above.


I don't recall Mailman's behavior for reply_goes_to_list=This List to 
say for sure, but I would think that without first_strip_reply_to that 
Mailman would add the list as an additional Reply-To.  Thus replies 
would go to the value of Reply-To /and/ to the list.


Some people would regard it as a problem that the replies to user B 
aren't directed towards the list.


I agree for discussion lists.

As you say, setting Reply-To to the same as From should have no effect, 
but that's not the case in this configuration.  (Nor is it the case for 
Stephen's proposed "smart single reply", at the MUA end; in his proposal 
an explicit Reply-To beats List-Post beats From.)


(I would regard it as a problem that replies to user A *are* directed 
toward the list, but we're not talking about my preferences here; I'm 
just trying to explain why some people have a problem with a message 
that has Reply-To the same as From.)


ACK

Thank you for the explanation.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Mark Sapiro]

On 01/30/2018 04:53 PM, Jordan Brown wrote:
> 
> (that is, first_strip_reply_to=No, reply_goes_to_list=This List)
> 
> Then if user A sends a message to the list without a Reply-To, replies
> will go to the list, but if user B sends a message to the list with
> "Reply-To: " replies will go to user B.


No.  In the User A case messages from the list will have a Reply-To with
the list address and replies (ignoring the pathological recent
Thunderbird) will go to the list as you say, but in the User B case,
messages from the list will have a Reply-To with both User B's address
and the list address and replies will go to both User B and the list.

Of course, not all MUA's behave exactly the same with reply in cases
where there are multiple addresses in Reply-To: but reasonable ones at
least will address the reply to all the Reply-To: addresses.

-- 
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Jordan Brown]

[ Feh.  My biggest MUA<->ML nuisance is that I don't have a way to force
replies to use the custom From address that I use for that mailing
list.  Grant, sorry for the dup. ]

On 1/30/2018 3:42 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote:
> On 01/30/2018 03:11 PM, Jordan Brown wrote:
>> There are those who would consider it a problem if your mailing list
>> is (mis:-)configured to add "Reply-To: " if there is no
>> existing "Reply-To".
>
> I don't see how the MLM's behavior (good / bad / indifferent) has
> anything to do with this being a problem.  Specifically that the
> sample message has the Reply-To: set to the same value as the From:.

If your Mailman is configured so:

Should any existing Reply-To: header found in the original message
be stripped? If so, this will be done regardless of whether an
explict Reply-To: header is added by Mailman or not. 
(Edit *first_strip_reply_to*)



No  Yes

Where are replies to list messages
directed? Poster is /strongly/ recommended for most mailing lists. 
(Details for *reply_goes_to_list*)



Poster  This list   Explicit address

(that is, first_strip_reply_to=No, reply_goes_to_list=This List)

Then if user A sends a message to the list without a Reply-To, replies
will go to the list, but if user B sends a message to the list with
"Reply-To: " replies will go to user B.

Some people would regard it as a problem that the replies to user B
aren't directed towards the list.

As you say, setting Reply-To to the same as From should have no effect,
but that's not the case in this configuration.  (Nor is it the case for
Stephen's proposed "smart single reply", at the MUA end; in his proposal
an explicit Reply-To beats List-Post beats From.)

(I would regard it as a problem that replies to user A *are* directed
toward the list, but we're not talking about my preferences here; I'm
just trying to explain why some people have a problem with a message
that has Reply-To the same as From.)

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users]

On 01/30/2018 03:11 PM, Jordan Brown wrote:
There are those who would consider it a problem if your mailing list is 
(mis:-)configured to add "Reply-To: " if there is no existing 
"Reply-To".


I don't see how the MLM's behavior (good / bad / indifferent) has 
anything to do with this being a problem.  Specifically that the sample 
message has the Reply-To: set to the same value as the From:.


   From: Grant Taylor 
   To:  Mailman-Users 
   CC:  REDACTED 
   Reply-To: Grant Taylor 
   Subject:  Testing...

Replies will be routed to the author, where replies to other messages 
will be routed to the list.


I assume that you are referring to messages coming out of the MLM, in 
comparison to messages that went directly to CC recipients and where 
their replies would go.  I.e. if REDACTED replies to the above message 
vs a mailing list subscriber replying to the message they received.


I personally would try to avoid the above scenario, particularly when a 
discussion mailing list is one of the recipients.  Or I'd like configure 
the Reply-To: to reflect the mailing list.  (Of course that has it's own 
complications and failure modes.)




--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Mark Sapiro]

On 01/30/2018 02:43 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote:
> On 01/30/2018 03:02 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
>> Does it ave the same Message-ID though? I suppose if I reply-both on
>> this one, you'll have an easy way to check.
> 
> Yes, they frequently do have the same Message-ID.  About the only time
> they don't is if the MLM changes the Message-ID.


Which Mailman doesn't do except for posts to anonymous lists (for
privacy reasons) and posts gated to Usenet (for reasons having to do
with potential cross-posting to multiple lists that gate to Usenet but
to different news groups.

-- 
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users]

On 01/30/2018 03:09 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
To answer my own question, the one I got back from the list has the same 
message id that was sent out so a t least in this particular delivery 
chain nothing mangled it.


;-)

In that case keeping a list of the N last delivered message ids and 
discarding ones already on the list shouldn't be too difficult indeed.


Nope, that's not difficult do to.

The catch is that this doesn't do what I want it to do.

The only problem then is list mail will seldom land in the list 
sub-folders as the direct replies should almost always come first and 
land in inbox.


I don't know about the /only/ problem per say, but certainly /a/ problem.

I would much rather have a spurious message in my Inbox in addition to 
the message that I want, from the mailing list, in the folder for said 
mailing list.


In this case, I need something that will identify the dup in the Inbox 
and remove it when the message arrives from the mailing list, second / 
minutes / hours later.  This simply is not conducive to typical procmail 
(like) filtering schemes.


Also remember that these two messages are not identical.  They are 
close, and the message from the list is based off of the direct message.




--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users]

On 01/30/2018 03:02 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
Does it ave the same Message-ID though? I suppose if I reply-both on 
this one, you'll have an easy way to check.


Yes, they frequently do have the same Message-ID.  About the only time 
they don't is if the MLM changes the Message-ID.



(sending to both)


:-/

I prefer to only receive messages to the mailing list.  But I understand 
why you replied to both.  ;-)




--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users]

On 01/30/2018 03:04 PM, Jordan Brown wrote:
Even getting agreement on what constitutes an ambiguous case might 
be tough.


Agreement between people may be problematic.

I think it will be quite simple to get people to define what they like 
and dislike.  Which will likely differ from what other people say.


It is absolutely, 100%, clear to me what I want to happen on Reply and 
Reply All.  But it seems that that is not what you want to happen...


We are all entitled to our own opinions.  ;-)



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Jordan Brown]

On 1/30/2018 2:09 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> The only problem then is list mail will seldom land in the list
> sub-folders as the direct replies should almost always come first and
> land in inbox.

That depends entirely on how you design your filters.  My Mailman filter
looks for From, To, CC, or BCC containing mailman-users@python.org.  It
could also reasonably look for Envelope-To[*] containing
mail...@jordan.maileater.net, which would also capture private
Mailman-related conversations, but I haven't had enough of those to bother.

[*] Added by my MTA on receipt.

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Dimitri Maziuk]

And PPS my maildropex(7) has

'''
Check if the Message-ID: header in the message is identical to the same
header that was recently seen. Discard the message if it is, otherwise
   continue to filter the message:

   ‘reformail -D 8000 duplicate.cache‘
   if ( $RETURNCODE == 0 )
   exit

   The reformail[1] command maintains a list of recently seen
Message-IDs in the file duplicate.cache.
'''

-- 
Dimitri Maziuk
Programmer/sysadmin
BioMagResBank, UW-Madison -- http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Jordan Brown]

On 1/30/2018 1:33 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote:
> So I'm curious how the Reply-To: being set to the same thing as the
> From: causes any problems here.

There are those who would consider it a problem if your mailing list is
(mis:-)configured to add "Reply-To: " if there is no existing
"Reply-To".  Replies will be routed to the author, where replies to
other messages will be routed to the list.


--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Dimitri Maziuk]

To answer my own question, the one I got back from the list has the same
message id that was sent out so a t least in this particular delivery
chain nothing mangled it.

In that case keeping a list of the N last delivered message ids and
discarding ones already on the list shouldn't be too difficult indeed.
The only problem then is list mail will seldom land in the list
sub-folders as the direct replies should almost always come first and
land in inbox.

-- 
Dimitri Maziuk
Programmer/sysadmin
BioMagResBank, UW-Madison -- http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Jordan Brown]

On 1/30/2018 11:46 AM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote:
> The more we discuss this and the longer that this thread goes on,
> makes me think that this should be a user configurable action that the
> MUA prompts the user for what they want to reply to in the ambiguous case.

Even getting agreement on what constitutes an ambiguous case might be tough.

50% :-)
50% :-(

It is absolutely, 100%, clear to me what I want to happen on Reply and
Reply All.  But it seems that that is not what you want to happen...

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Dimitri Maziuk]

On 01/30/2018 03:27 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote:

> About the only thing that I can think to do would be to have my LDA
> deliver a copy of the post from the mailing list to a script that would
> search the Inbox for messages with the same Message-ID and then
> retroactively remove them.

Does it ave the same Message-ID though? I suppose if I reply-both on
this one, you'll have an easy way to check.

(sending to both)
-- 
Dimitri Maziuk
Programmer/sysadmin
BioMagResBank, UW-Madison -- http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Sample of an Uncaught bounce notification

[Julian H. Stacey]

Hi, Reference:
> From: Mark Sapiro 
> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 11:36:50 -0800

Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 01/30/2018 07:48 AM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> > 
> > Mark Sapiro wrote:  Fri, 12 Jan 2018 10:10:34 -0800
> >>
> >> Thank you for your report. In this case, the message that is an
> >> "unrecognized bounce" is not an actual bounce of a list message. It is a
> >> message (looks like spam)
> > 
> > Thanks Mark,
> > It's not spam, but a bilingual German & English change of address,
> > presumably from an auto responder from a subscribed address (I checked).
> 
> 
> Thank you for the clarification.
> 
> 
> ...
> > Thanks. At berklix.org I have no time for subscribers who consume
> > list owners' time with auto responders, I like mailman to auto
> > detect automatic response noise, & count & auto unsubscribe continuing
> > noisy subscrbers.
> > 
> > In case the sample is of use I will leave it here for a bit:
> > http://berklix.com/~jhs/tmp/mailman/uncaught_bounce_notification/1
> 
> 
> It's hard enough to recognize all the various non-compliant messages
> which are actually bounces of list mail and extract the bouncing
> address(es) from them.
> 
> While I sympathize with the problem of autoresponders replying to the
> list or the list-bounces address, to try to actually recognize such
> messages as what they are and attribute them to the actual list member
> is a task too daunting for me to consider.
> 
> For autoresponses to the list, you could use header_filter_rules to
> match things like auto-submitted or auto-replied and discard such
> messages, but that won't work for messages to the -bounces address.
> 
> You can chose to forward such messages to the list owners or ignore
> them,

OK, good idea, I'll see what I can set up to ignore


> but to ask Mailman to determine the responsible list member and
> score a bounce is more than I'm willing to try to do.

Thanks, sure, no problem.
Just posted it in case it might have been an easy case to catch.

Cheers,
Julian
-- 
Julian H. Stacey, Computer Consultant, BSD Linux Unix Systems Engineer, Munich
 http://berklix.eu/brexit/ UK stole 3,700,000 votes; 700,000 from Brits in EU.
 Last time Britain denied votes led to American War of Independence.
   http://berklix.eu/queen/  Petition to get votes back.
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users]

On 01/29/2018 10:14 AM, Chip Davis wrote:
I have a constant problem with well-meaning, but essentially ignorant, 
email users who, upon seeing a "Reply To:" field in their MUA's setup 
screen, dutifully fill it in with their email address.


I too have seen people fill in the Reply-To in the MUA setup screen.  - 
However I don't see the problem with it.


Recipients that hit reply (to a message that has not been modified) will 
go back to the author, via the From: or Reply-To:, particularly if the 
From: and Reply-To: are the same email address.


So I'm curious how the Reply-To: being set to the same thing as the 
From: causes any problems here.


Then they complain that even though they "replied to the list", their 
email went only to the poster.


It seems like you are describing two quite distinct things, 1) how the 
MUA is configured, and 2) where the replies to incoming messages go back 
out to.  IMHO the way the From: / Reply-To: are configured doesn't 
matter or impact where replies to incoming messages go.


What am I missing?



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users]

On 01/30/2018 01:43 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
Dep. on your MDA setup, list replies could go to list folder and off-list 
copies: to main inbox. In which case I think that thunderbird plug-in 
would not work either, even if you still have both on disk.


That's the exact scenario (save for the predictable race condition) that 
I'm dealing with.


Direct replies land in inbox b/c they don't match any filter.  The 
direct reply arrives before the copy passes through the mailing list. 
Once the copy arrives from the mailing list, it gets filed in a folder 
for the mailing list.


About the only thing that I can think to do would be to have my LDA 
deliver a copy of the post from the mailing list to a script that would 
search the Inbox for messages with the same Message-ID and then 
retroactively remove them.


I suppose I could do this, but I've not (yet) been motivated (enough) to 
do so.




--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Dimitri Maziuk]

On 01/30/2018 02:33 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote:

> ...  I'm also
> not aware of much that Thunderbird can do.

There is/was a plug-in for finding duplicates. It only works if you have
both, if you already deleted the off-list copy that's no different from
what you get with procmail.

Dep. on your MDA setup, list replies could go to list folder and
off-list copies: to main inbox. In which case I think that thunderbird
plug-in would not work either, even if you still have both on disk.

-- 
Dimitri Maziuk
Programmer/sysadmin
BioMagResBank, UW-Madison -- http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users]

On 01/26/2018 09:41 PM, Jordan Brown wrote:
I was suggesting that one way to address that complaint would be for 
your mail client to detect the duplication and hide the duplicate copies.


That sounds good in theory.  But the practice that I'm exposed to 
doesn't work out well.


I usually receive the direct replies before the copy from the mailing 
list.  With the copy coming in from the mailing list after the message 
directly to me is processed, there is little chance of retroactively 
removing the original copy.  At least from procmail filters.  I'm also 
not aware of much that Thunderbird can do.


Hence good in theory, bad in practice.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users]

On 01/28/2018 09:40 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
OK.  But I'm not saying "always."  I'm saying that this would DTRT for me 
a very large proportion of the time, and for AOLers, about 100% of the 
time to 6 sigmas.


I think that's a question of corpus.  DTRT for you is different from 
DTRT for me which also likely differs from other subscribers to this list.


Others have used the word "right".  From the point of view of the 
Internet, there's no "right" off the Internet, and MUAs are off the 
Internet.


Just because an MUA isn't on the Internet, does not mean that it 
shouldn't play by the same or very similar rules.  Further, where an MUA 
is run, be it a fat local client like Thunderbird, or a think web client 
like Gmail, shouldn't change what the MUA does.


The question is desired behavior, and whether that desired behavior can 
be achieved efficiently (little information to remember, few keystrokes, 
etc) and mnemonically for a given set of users who desire that behavior.


Agreed.

In the end it's an empirical question.  Unfortunately it's hard to get 
information about the target population (it's not Mutt users!) without 
getting the algorithm into one of the big MUAs.


I would go so far as to say that this is likely something that should be 
a user definable configuration.  Which means that MUAs should understand 
multiple operations and let the end user decide what they want to do.


Mutt and Gnus have had that for as long as I can remember.  But there's 
always a huge constituency for a one-button do-what-I-mean function. 
"It's obvious what I want, why doesn't this stupid software get it?" 
I think this algorithm provides that function.


The more we discuss this and the longer that this thread goes on, makes 
me think that this should be a user configurable action that the MUA 
prompts the user for what they want to reply to in the ambiguous case. 
Likely with some tuning and parameters to reduce the number of pop ups.


Where is List-Post a conformance issue?  You add it if you want to inform 
people and MUAs where to post, and you don't if you don't.


I don't think me adding the List-Post header to a message going into a 
mailing list will work out very well.  -  I expect that the MLM would 
munge it (if configured to add the List-Post header itself) or remove it.


I'm saying we can exploit a high correlation between "availability" 
of posting to the list (the RFC semantics of List-Post) and a desire to 
direct discussion (ie, replies) to the list.


I think that it would be nice to express such a desire.  However I don't 
think the List-Post header is for that purpose.


It has been a user education issue for 40 years in my experience, though. 
At some point we need to accept that users are ineducable.


Agreed.

I still believe that user are the root cause of much angst.

I'm suggesting that there should be four functions (reply to author, 
reply to list, reply to all, and "smart" reply).  I suspect that for a 
lot of users, "smart" reply will be all they ever use.


Fair.

There are a number of people eating Tide pods too.  I can't help them 
and I'm getting tired of Darwin taking too long to help them.


Taken seriously that would mean you believe that UI/UX design is 
impossible.  You actually deny you believe that, and I can't go down 
that road.  Most users are not willing to design their own UI.


I think you misunderstood what I was saying.

I was saying that I think it's wrong for us to make assumptions about 
what other people do, and to further turn those assumptions into belief 
that they will do what we think.


UI/UX design can help with some, if not many, things.  But the users 
have to have a fundamental understanding of what they are doing.


Without said fundamental understanding, the very best UI / UX will still 
fail.


Users may not be willing to design their own UI, but many do choose the 
UI that they use.  Thus, there is choice involved.


If I thought this was just me, I wouldn't have posted.  I've been 
observing the concerns of mailing list owners for two decades, and I 
believe that if this algorithm were used in all major MUAs, there would 
be no demand for Reply-To munging.


Maybe, maybe not.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Sample of an Uncaught bounce notification

[Mark Sapiro]

On 01/30/2018 07:48 AM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> 
> Mark Sapiro wrote:  Fri, 12 Jan 2018 10:10:34 -0800
>>
>> Thank you for your report. In this case, the message that is an
>> "unrecognized bounce" is not an actual bounce of a list message. It is a
>> message (looks like spam)
> 
> Thanks Mark,
> It's not spam, but a bilingual German & English change of address,
> presumably from an auto responder from a subscribed address (I checked).


Thank you for the clarification.


...
> Thanks. At berklix.org I have no time for subscribers who consume
> list owners' time with auto responders, I like mailman to auto
> detect automatic response noise, & count & auto unsubscribe continuing
> noisy subscrbers.
> 
> In case the sample is of use I will leave it here for a bit:
> http://berklix.com/~jhs/tmp/mailman/uncaught_bounce_notification/1


It's hard enough to recognize all the various non-compliant messages
which are actually bounces of list mail and extract the bouncing
address(es) from them.

While I sympathize with the problem of autoresponders replying to the
list or the list-bounces address, to try to actually recognize such
messages as what they are and attribute them to the actual list member
is a task too daunting for me to consider.

For autoresponses to the list, you could use header_filter_rules to
match things like auto-submitted or auto-replied and discard such
messages, but that won't work for messages to the -bounces address.

You can chose to forward such messages to the list owners or ignore
them, but to ask Mailman to determine the responsible list member and
score a bounce is more than I'm willing to try to do.

-- 
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Sample of an Uncaught bounce notification

[Julian H. Stacey]

Mark Sapiro wrote:  Fri, 12 Jan 2018 10:10:34 -0800
> On 01/12/2018 07:43 AM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> > Is this live sample of an Uncaught bounce notification useful to
> > forward to developers to extend pattern matching.
> > 
> > http://berklix.com/~jhs/tmp/mailman/uncaught_bounce_notification/1
> 
> 
> Thank you for your report. In this case, the message that is an
> "unrecognized bounce" is not an actual bounce of a list message. It is a
> message (looks like spam)

Thanks Mark,
It's not spam, but a bilingual German & English change of address,
presumably from an auto responder from a subscribed address (I checked).
as per
From: Dave Dowdy 

> sent directly to the gea-chat-bounces@...

Which I assume it got from list header of previous post to list:
Errors-to: gea-chat-boun...@mailman.berklix.org
Sender: "Gea-chat" 

> address. This happens from time to time, but short of Mailman trying to
> recognize spam sent to the -bounces address, there's nothing we can do,
> and spam recognition and filtering is better done at the incoming MTA level.

OK, I accept that spam filtering is best left to other tools,
but this is not spam, but an auto responce from a subscribed address,
so if mailman could recognise it automaticaly it would be nice.


From: Grant Taylor  Fri, 12 Jan 2018 11:16:46 -0700 (19:16 CET)

> > Is this live sample of an Uncaught bounce notification useful to
> > forward to developers to extend pattern matching.
> > 
> > http://berklix.com/~jhs/tmp/mailman/uncaught_bounce_notification/1
> 
> I highly doubt it.
> 
> The bounce that is in the email you linked to looks to be more an 
> auto-reply than an actual bounce.
> 
> The message that Mailman is considering to be an uncaught bounce does 
> not have any of the typical hallmarks of any DSNs or MDNs that I've seen.
> 
>   - It is a single text/plain, not the expected multipart/report.
>   - It is auto-replied (vacation), not auto-generated (failure).
>   - It looks like a message that a human wrote (in two languages.)
>   - It has an In-Reply-To header, which I've never seen in DSNs.
> 
> My opinion is that this is the exact type of use case for a bounce 
> message to be escalated to a human.

Thanks. At berklix.org I have no time for subscribers who consume
list owners' time with auto responders, I like mailman to auto
detect automatic response noise, & count & auto unsubscribe continuing
noisy subscrbers.

In case the sample is of use I will leave it here for a bit:
http://berklix.com/~jhs/tmp/mailman/uncaught_bounce_notification/1

Cheers,
Julian
-- 
Julian H. Stacey, Computer Consultant, BSD Linux Unix Systems Engineer, Munich
 http://berklix.eu/brexit/ UK stole 3,700,000 votes; 700,000 from Brits in EU.
 Last time Britain denied votes led to American War of Independence.
   http://berklix.eu/queen/  Petition to get votes back.
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Dimitri Maziuk]

On 2018-01-29 23:51, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

... [ Reply-To ] should have a checkbox "same as my

 From address."


Oh, great, now I'll rreecceeiivvee eevveerryytthhiinngg ttwwiiccee..

Dima

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Mark Sapiro]

On 01/29/2018 11:01 PM, Jordan Brown wrote:
> 
> So for the general case where you might have gotten a message directly,
> and through list A, and through list B, the result is random unless you
> pay careful attention to how you got this particular copy of the message.


If you received the message directly, it won't have a List-Post: header
and there will be no Reply-List function. In other cases, the List-Post:
header will contain the posting address of the list from which you
received the specific instance of the message to which you're replying
and Reply-List will go to that list only.

-- 
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org