Sandy, Thank you for your comments.
I am sure you spent a reasonable amount of time coming up with this very well thought out response, however, none of your comments addressed the needs of my client. From my client's perspective there is only one question that needs to be answered... Is it done yet! Since I know that the sender of the original email is always going to be a registered list member I can forego the formalities of the RFC. I am not concered about hackers and spammers because in general the messages are coming from a very well define user group. On that note, you have uncovered for me a possible point of attack by hackers. There is nothing stopping the someone from sending messages directly to the Program Alias rather being forwarded by the inbound list rules. I can easily modify my code to ensure that the original message was bound for my list or I can lookup the sender in my list of subscribers. This should thwart the hackers and spammers. Thanks again, --Jeff -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:IMail_Forum-owner@;list.ipswitch.com] On Behalf Of Sanford Whiteman Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 7:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re[6]: [IMail Forum] Auto-Reply for List Rules Violations > I understand your point however, I don't believe that the RFC's > apply here. I am not "Bouncing" messages, I am responding to them. The RFCs do apply, exactly as they would if you were writing an SMTP-to-proprietary gateway. This doesn't mean your app needs to act like a full-fledged MTA; it simply means that the information in the SMTP transaction and data needs to be interpreted per the RFCs (since it presumably originates from an RFC-compliant MUA). As such, the message will contain envelope and header information that may differ for specific reasons. It's my opinion that you should be using the envelope information for what are essentially non-delivery notifications (even if you don't consider them bounces). Yet I understand your position to the contrary, especially given that the Program Alias functionality makes it impossible to be so thorough! And given that most commercial MTAs do not separate the From: and the MAIL FROM:, it is unlikely that your architecture will be undone by a non-hacker or -spammer. In fact, trying to look at it from your point of view, if you're really trying to contact the human accepting new messages in reply to the e-mail, a Reply-To: may be a better fit than the From:, should the former exist. -Sandy To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
