Article View: net.mail.headers
Article #611Re: Subject: Loop control mechanisms in mailing lists
From: Jacob_Palme_QZ%QZCOM.MAILNET
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1986 02:34
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1986 02:34
18 lines
1340 bytes
1340 bytes
Your solution of appending a postmark on the message is a variant of my method (2). This method should have been formulated in more general terms, to append some kind of trace information on the message. I prefer to put the postmark in the TO field for the following reasons: (a) What you want to stop is not the same message looping back to the same host. This, in fact, can be perfectly legal in some cases. What you want to stop is the message looping back to the same mailing list. (b) The TO: field is one of the safest field from being munged by header-munging systems. Best of course would be to have an additional, special field in the headers intended for this kind of trace information - provided that all systems accept and are willing to handle this trace field in the proper manner.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1026@brl-smoke.ARPA>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!brl-smoke!smoke!Jacob_Palme_QZ%QZCOM.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPAShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!brl-smoke!smoke!Jacob_Palme_QZ%QZCOM.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA From: Jacob_Palme_QZ%QZCOM.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Newsgroups: net.mail.headers Subject: Re: Subject: Loop control mechanisms in mailing lists Message-ID: <1026@brl-smoke.ARPA> Date: Mon, 17-Feb-86 21:34:08 EST Article-I.D.: brl-smok.1026 Posted: Mon Feb 17 21:34:08 1986 Date-Received: Wed, 19-Feb-86 20:30:04 EST Sender: news@brl-smoke.ARPA Lines: 18