Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(May 2001)

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: problem
From: Nick Simicich <njs @ scifi . squawk . com>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 19:20:34 -0400
To: List-Managers @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to: <>
References: <><>

At 04:56 PM 5/3/2001 -0400, Sharon Tucci wrote:
>the original message. Logically, these bounces SHOULD be
>going direct to the FROM address or REPLY TO address in
>posts, but they are actually going to the return-path
>address instead.

Hiss, boo, evil! Autoresponders should go to the RFC821 sender (what you
are calling Return path) so that they do not go to lists and pollute them.

For human senders, these are probably the same address, which is what you
want. For lists, these are not, which is also what you want.

The reality is just as was suggested:  These bounces need to be parsed, so
that auto-responder stuff can be ignored.
We will fight for bovine freedom, And hold our large heads high.
We will run free, with the buffalo or die! Cows with Guns.
 - Dana Lyons, Cows With Guns
Nick Simicich -- Stop by and Light Up The World!

Indexed By Date Previous: Re: New mailing list host?
From: J C Lawrence <>
Next: Mailing lists for -emarketing
From: "Jessica Callender" <>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: problem
From: Sharon Tucci <>
Next: autoresponders and vacation notices (was: problem)
From: James M Galvin <>

Search Internet Search