From: hughes@ah.com (Eric Hughes)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: dc7fe2faf5abfbe0445aebd7165754fec242d57908b5816b84bd24866352cb6d
Message ID: <9309091827.AA02544@ah.com>
Reply To: <199309090641.AA24013@mail.eunet.fi>
UTC Datetime: 1993-09-09 18:37:22 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 9 Sep 93 11:37:22 PDT
From: hughes@ah.com (Eric Hughes)
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 93 11:37:22 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: REMAIL: pasting
In-Reply-To: <199309090641.AA24013@mail.eunet.fi>
Message-ID: <9309091827.AA02544@ah.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
>Yeah. I am amazed that people don't get it right. My server sends out
>messages looking like this:
> From: anXXXXX@anon.penet.fi
> Reply-To: anXXXXX@anon.penet.fi
> Sender: anon@anon.penet.fi
>And there are _lots_ of systems out there that send te reply to
>"anon@anon.penet.fi"! Elm and VMSMail are the most obvious ones.
Even worse, there are mailers that respond to the out-of-band sender
information that appears in the first line (not in the header!) as the
"From " information.
Bounce message (almost) always go back to the out-of-band sender, so
we changed the cypherpunks list alias on toad.com to generate that as
the out-of-band sender. Now bounce message return to a different
mailbox and my inbox at toad.com is clear for regular list
maintenance.
Nonetheless, I still get a number of attempted posts to the mailing
list at large _and_ requests for list maintenance (?!) to the
owner-cypherpunks alias.
If only mail software were consistent, ...
Eric
Return to September 1993
Return to “Johan Helsingius <julf@penet.fi>”