Great Circle Associates Majordomo-Workers
(May 1998)
 

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

Subject: Re: Single-command addresses
From: Manar Hussain <manar @ ivision . co . uk>
Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 10:49:28 +0100
To: majordomo-workers @ greatcircle . com
In-reply-to: <ufayawhh307.fsf@sina.hpc.uh.edu>
References: <Manar Hussain's message of "Tue, 05 May 1998 01:49:22 +0100"><3.0.5.32.19980505014922.008f1890@stingray.ivision.co.uk>

>MH> I think this is going to definately be desired by some sites but as you
>MH> pointed out it's got negatives as well as positives so other sites may
well
>MH> not want it.
>
>But then you lose uniformity between sites.  I see this as a rather bad
>thing.

Yeah, that's kinda why I said I'd go for just zubscribe and unzubscribe (so
that you'd probably be fairly happy to have it on all sites).

>MH> Forgive me if I've missed out on a feature already implemented/planned (I
>MH> recall this being discussed before) but what I think may be wanted is the
>MH> ability to freeze (/bounce for approval) certain MLM actions based on
some
>MH> stateful info.
>
>This has been discussed.  Of course there is a way to limit any action
>based on regexp match on the victim address, membership in any of an
>arbitrary number of address lists and action specific variable comparisons,
>but nobody has yet come up with a well thought out concept for time-based
>limiting.  When that is done, the access control mechanism already supports
>it.  
>
>There have been various mechanisms proposed but it is desirable to have
>one that requires no per-user state and which doesn't require keeping a
>large amount of global state.  This isn't necessarily an easy thing to do.

probably best if I have a better dig through the archives before going any
further on this ...

>MH> BTW - is there ever an attempt to check, if appropriate, email
>MH> deliverability before accepting commands/messages etc.
>
>This is, of course, completely impossible.  Even for an MTA.  The only way
>to ensure deliverability is to send a message and request a response.  Of
>course we check for syntactic validity of the address, but that is a
>completely different thing.

What you can do is check the syntax and confirm that there are appropriate
MX records - i.e. the definition of deliverability is "an MTA would have a
machine that it would be able to send this mail to - even if it might then
get bounced for whatever reasons". (we do this before accepting email
addresses on web forms etc. - in our case a simple call to exim does this
for us).

Not sure it's worth it in anywhere in mj though ...

Manar


Follow-Ups:
References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Single-command addresses
From: Norbert Bollow <bollow@math.ethz.ch>
Next: Re: Single-command addresses
From: Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs@hpc.uh.edu>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Single-command addresses
From: Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs@hpc.uh.edu>
Next: Re: Single-command addresses
From: Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs@hpc.uh.edu>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com