At 08:17 04/06/2003, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:On Tue, Jun 03, 2003 at 05:05:44PM +0100, Richard Barrett wrote:
> At 16:25 03/06/2003, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> >|From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I think you will also find some versions of MS Outlook display this
> conflation of several headers in the "From" field of their GUI (see
> http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq02.003.htp).
Yes, that's exactly what it's about, right.
> The purpose of this behaviour is presumably to alert the end user to > the possibility of something "nefarious" because of the (entirely > valid) discrepancy between different headers on a message.
Between the envelope-from (Sender-Header) and the From: header.
> This behaviour cannot be controlled by Mailman because it is the > programmed into the MUA's GUI code.
Of course it can, because the Sender-Header must not be the -bounces address like I said, it can be the usual mailing-list address instead. The �Return-Path� header is the only one that must be set to the -bounces address, to not loose the bounce-handling of mailman.
Thanks for your input, though. I guess I'll have to dig myself. Alfie
If you want to try making your suggested change then (for MM 2.1.2) look to line 342 of Mailman/Handlers/SMTPDirect.py in function bulkdeliver() and change:
msg['Sender'] = envsender
to read:
msg['Sender'] = mlist.GetListEmail()
Do not forget that indentation is syntactically significant in Python!
This change should lead to the SMTP envelope having the bounce alias on it while the Sender is just the list alias. Do not blame me if inappropriate stuff starts getting posted to the list because of the change and do let us know how you get on with the change.
A general enquiry to Mailman experts.
I've tried the patch I suggested above on my test system and it doesn't appear to break anything.
MTA's such as Outlook show "From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED]" which removes the objected to -bounces suffix in the displayed "From" field.
Bounce processing works OK
What are the objections to this revision of the Sender header? Is it just the risk of a geriatric MTA returning mail to the Sender address, and hence sending to the list with unpleasant consequences, when it should be returning to the SMTP envelope sender?
Thought or comments please
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Richard Barrett http://www.openinfo.co.uk
------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
