From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Feb 9 15:59:31 2004 Received: from dr-nick.w3.org (dr-nick.w3.org [18.29.1.73]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7457055457 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 15:59:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from ogobogo.w3.org (homer.w3.org [18.29.0.30]) by dr-nick.w3.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5798D3F40D1 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 18:59:04 -0500 (EST) Received: by ogobogo.w3.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 34829FC83; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 18:59:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 18:59:02 -0500 From: Gerald Oskoboiny To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: subbing envelope sender vs from:? Message-ID: <20040209235902.GA14174@impressive.net> Mail-Followup-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-Archive-Number: 200402/1 X-Sequence-Number: 1749 Upon receiving sub requests, some list management software attempts to sub the email address given in the From: header, others attempts to sub the envelope sender. Which behavior is correct, and why? I took a quick look at RFCs 2821 and 2822 and did a bit of googling but didn't find a good reference. Does anyone know a good set of general guidelines for mailing list software that makes reference to the relevant RFCs? Thanks! -- Gerald Oskoboiny http://impressive.net/people/gerald/ From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Feb 9 16:07:07 2004 Received: from mail1.panix.com (mail1.panix.com [166.84.1.72]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2F434FDC8 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 16:06:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailspool2.panix.com (mailspool2.panix.com [166.84.1.79]) by mail1.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2CA04873E for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 19:06:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from panix.com (cpe-66-87-152-33.il.sprintbbd.net [66.87.152.33]) by mailspool2.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0A0D2378C0 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 19:06:41 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <40282058.5090606@panix.com> Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 18:05:44 -0600 From: "David W. Tamkin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: subbing envelope sender vs from:? References: <20040209235902.GA14174@impressive.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200402/2 X-Sequence-Number: 1750 Gerald Oskoboiny wrote: > Upon receiving sub requests, some list management software > attempts to sub the email address given in the From: header, > others attempts to sub the envelope sender. I hope that "attempts to sub" means "sends a confirmation request to." > Which behavior is correct, and why? Can either be trusted any more? It's tempting to answer, "Neither." From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Feb 9 16:17:01 2004 Received: from play.gamerz.net (www.gamerz.net [66.92.144.25]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C9F355457 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 16:16:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from play.gamerz.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by play.gamerz.net (Switch-3.1.3/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id i1A0Gkch014815 (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168 bits) verified NO) for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 19:16:46 -0500 Received: (from rrognlie@localhost) by play.gamerz.net (Switch-3.1.3/Switch-3.1.0/Submit) id i1A0GkW8014814 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 19:16:46 -0500 Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 19:16:46 -0500 From: Richard Rognlie To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: subbing envelope sender vs from:? Message-ID: <20040210001646.GW6454@gamerz.net> References: <20040209235902.GA14174@impressive.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040209235902.GA14174@impressive.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Archive-Number: 200402/3 X-Sequence-Number: 1751 On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 06:59:02PM -0500, Gerald Oskoboiny wrote: > Upon receiving sub requests, some list management software > attempts to sub the email address given in the From: header, > others attempts to sub the envelope sender. > > Which behavior is correct, and why? > > I took a quick look at RFCs 2821 and 2822 and did a bit of > googling but didn't find a good reference. > > Does anyone know a good set of general guidelines for mailing > list software that makes reference to the relevant RFCs? http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-moore-auto-email-response-05.txt has some good guidelines. It has expired, but its still useful. -- / \__ | Richard Rognlie / Sendmail Ninja / Gamerz.NET Lackey \__/ \ | #define SIX 1 + 5 /* http://www.gamerz.net/~rrognlie/ */ / \__/ | #define NINE 8 + 1 /* */ \__/ | main() { printf( "The meaning of life: %d\n", SIX * NINE ); } From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Feb 9 16:22:54 2004 Received: from dr-nick.w3.org (dr-nick.w3.org [18.29.1.73]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ECAF5565F for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 16:22:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from ogobogo.w3.org (homer.w3.org [18.29.0.30]) by dr-nick.w3.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEA293F4152; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 19:22:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by ogobogo.w3.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 47BFCFC83; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 19:22:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 19:22:36 -0500 From: Gerald Oskoboiny To: "David W. Tamkin" Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: subbing envelope sender vs from:? Message-ID: <20040210002235.GB14174@impressive.net> Mail-Followup-To: "David W. Tamkin" , list-managers@greatcircle.com References: <20040209235902.GA14174@impressive.net> <40282058.5090606@panix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40282058.5090606@panix.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-Archive-Number: 200402/4 X-Sequence-Number: 1752 * David W. Tamkin [2004-02-09 18:05-0600] > Gerald Oskoboiny wrote: > > >Upon receiving sub requests, some list management software > >attempts to sub the email address given in the From: header, > >others attempts to sub the envelope sender. > > I hope that "attempts to sub" means "sends a confirmation request to." Yes. > > Which behavior is correct, and why? > > Can either be trusted any more? It's tempting to answer, "Neither." Yes, if both sites have deployed SPF for forgery prevention. http://spf.pobox.com/ (but that's not directly relevant to my question) -- Gerald Oskoboiny http://impressive.net/people/gerald/ From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Feb 10 07:18:47 2004 Received: from yertle.kcilink.com (yertle.kcilink.com [65.205.34.180]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0278531D5 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 07:08:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.7.103] (host-103.int.kcilink.com [192.168.7.103]) by yertle.kcilink.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E207C217BF for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 10:08:18 -0500 (EST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v612) In-Reply-To: <20040209235902.GA14174@impressive.net> References: <20040209235902.GA14174@impressive.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Vivek Khera Subject: Re: subbing envelope sender vs from:? Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 10:08:18 -0500 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.612) X-Archive-Number: 200402/5 X-Sequence-Number: 1753 On Feb 9, 2004, at 6:59 PM, Gerald Oskoboiny wrote: > Upon receiving sub requests, some list management software > attempts to sub the email address given in the From: header, > others attempts to sub the envelope sender. > Well, I ran into this just the other day. One list I'm on moved from one server running Mailman to another running ezmlm. I had been subscribed to the list with two addresses: one which fed into my local (private) news server to archive the messages and make for easier reading, and the other as "nomail" to post to the list. With the move to ezmlm, it insists on subscribing the envelope sender address, which makes it quite difficult to subscribe my news server's address. Aside from that ezmlm has no "nomail" setting, so I just left that list... :-( I therefore believe that the right thing to do is to use the header "From:" address, as it provides for more flexibility (and no, SPF won't protect you from forging that, since it applies to envelope sender). =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Vivek Khera, Ph.D. Khera Communications, Inc. Internet: khera@kciLink.com Rockville, MD +1-301-869-4449 x806 AIM: vivekkhera Y!: vivek_khera http://www.khera.org/~vivek/ From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Feb 27 14:35:37 2004 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5723B50D26 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 14:35:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from user-0cdvtqg.cable.mindspring.com ([24.223.247.80] helo=PUBLICUS2) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1AwqYH-000556-00; Fri, 27 Feb 2004 14:33:49 -0800 Reply-To: From: "Steven Clift" To: , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: E-mail Lists and Web Integration Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 16:34:08 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal X-Archive-Number: 200402/6 X-Sequence-Number: 1754 I have a dream, that someday e-mail lists and the web will walk hand in hand. In short, I want smarter e-mail lists to connect with dumber web forums with clean crisp usable interfaces (database drive archives with "skins" including a e-list to blog version with trackback, etc.), personalized content tracking across multiple groups, rss headline feeds, and web-based features like member directories and social networking options that will work best on the web. What I don't want is a system that makes e-mail users second class citizens and prejudices the system toward web-only posting. Perhaps Mailman 3 might be one of the open source paths we can take? As they develop their next set of project requirements I encourage you to contribute your ideas and technical abilities. Steven Clift http://publicus.net P.S. http://E-Democracy.Org has been monitoring the potential open source explorations of DGroups for some time and has dozens of links and text on this subject at: http://www.e-democracy.org/center/eweb.html ------- Forwarded message follows ------- From: Barry Warsaw To: mailman-developers@python.org Date sent: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 23:40:35 -0500 Subject: [Mailman-Announce] Mailman 3 development list I've created a list specifically for discussing Mailman 3 design and development. Feel free to subscribe at: http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman3-dev [SLC - MORE: http://www.list.org/devs.html ] I'd like to keep MM3 discussions off the main mailman-developers list as much as possible. The list will be open and will be run with essentially the same policies as mailman-developers and mailman-users, except that it will reject posts by non-members. Sorry, but I think this will help keep the signal to noise ratio high and it reduces my administrative burden. I want to give the list a few days to get populated and then I'll start posting some issues in preparation for the upcoming sprint at Pycon. -Barry _______________________________________________ Mailman-announce mailing list Mailman-announce@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-announce Steven Clift - http://publicus.net - Reply to: clift@publicus.net Join DoWire: http://e-democracy.org/do Speaking requests: http://publicus.net/speaker.html Watch my BBC World interview: http://publicus.net/media.html