🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <18ge7eINN6r9@agate.berkeley.edu> bbehlen@soda.berkeley.edu (Vitamin B (Brian Behlendorf)) writes:
>	Apologies in advance for the newbie question, but the sendmail man
>page was not helpful about this.  I run a mailing list out of this machine
>called sfraves, with about 215 users.  Right now the "From:" line reads
>"sfraves-request", so that only I will have to deal with MAILER DAEMON 
>problems and not the original writer of whatever gets posted to the list.
>On most machines, the name and address of the original writer does stay in
>the header, so people can tell who wrote a particular post.  However, some
>mail programs seem to strip away that second "From:" line, so that every 
>piece of mail seems to come from "sfraves-request", and the real writer's
>name is unknown.  So, I would like to add an "Originator:" or "Originally
>From:" line to every post that goes through the sfraves alias, so that
>those people with the messed-up mail programs can still see who the original
>writer is, with bounced messages still going to sfraves-request.
>

From: originator@some.where
Resent-From: sfraves-request@other.place

Might possibly work, but RFC-822 specifically bypasses the precedence issue:

          Use of such precedence  information  depends  upon  partici-
     pants'  communication needs.  For example, this standard does not
     dictate when a "Resent-From:" address should receive replies,  in
     lieu of sending them to the "From:" address.


Another possible format is:

From: originator@some.where
Sender: sfraves-request@other.place
Reply-To: sfraves@other.place 

This would probably work in the manner you want ( Again, quote from rfc822 ):

     4.4.4.  AUTOMATIC USE OF FROM / SENDER / REPLY-TO

        For systems which automatically  generate  address  lists  for
        replies to messages, the following recommendations are made:

            o   The "Sender" field mailbox should be sent  notices  of
                any  problems in transport or delivery of the original
                messages.  If there is no  "Sender"  field,  then  the
                "From" field mailbox should be used.

            o   The  "Sender"  field  mailbox  should  NEVER  be  used
                automatically, in a recipient's reply message.

            o   If the "Reply-To" field exists, then the reply  should
                go to the addresses indicated in that field and not to
                the address(es) indicated in the "From" field.

            o   If there is a "From" field, but no  "Reply-To"  field,
                the  reply should be sent to the address(es) indicated
                in the "From" field.

        Sometimes, a recipient may actually wish to  communicate  with
        the  person  that  initiated  the  message  transfer.  In such
        cases, it is reasonable to use the "Sender" address.

        This recommendation is intended  only  for  automated  use  of
        originator-fields  and is not intended to suggest that replies
        may not also be sent to other recipients of messages.   It  is
        up  to  the  respective  mail-handling programs to decide what
        additional facilities will be provided.




-Ref:	RFC #  822  (Obsoletes:  RFC #733)
	STANDARD FOR THE FORMAT OF ARPA INTERNET TEXT MESSAGES
	August 13, 1982, Revised by David H. Crocker


======== "If you have a hammer, find a nail" - George Bush,'91  =========
 Steven D. Majewski		University of Virginia Physiology Dept.
 sdm7g@Virginia.EDU		Box 449 Health Sciences Center
 Voice: (804)-982-0831/32	1300 Jefferson Park Avenue
 FAX:   (804)-982-1616		Charlottesville, VA 22908

Steven D. Majewski <sdm7g@aemsun.med.Virginia.EDU> writes:
|
|   Another possible format is:
|
|   From: originator@some.where
|   Sender: sfraves-request@other.place
|   Reply-To: sfraves@other.place

Please don't.  This causes a large number of misaddressed messages, and
makes naive users unnecessarily involved in headers, since they can't
reply to the author without replying to the whole list.

This problem is compounded if the messages is crossposted to several
lists.

We should have learned from BITNET listservers by now, although they
seem to be very hard dying.

Best regards,
</Erik>
--
Erik Naggum             |  ISO  8879 SGML     |      +47 295 0313
                        |  ISO 10744 HyTime   |
<erik@naggum.no>        |  ISO 10646 UCS      |      Memento, terrigena.
<enag@ifi.uio.no>       |  ISO  9899 C        |      Memento, vita brevis.