On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 00:00 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > Sender doesn't instruct *conformant* MTAs at all, does it? AFAIK the > only thing that a RFC 2821-conforming MTA looks at is the Return-Path > header, and it's supposed to remove that. > > So this is purely a matter of pragmatic self-defense against broken > MTAs that do bounce to Sender.
Correct, and what we're trying to figure out is whether we need that self-defense any longer. The change to test this may be as simple as commenting out "msg['Sender'] = envsender" in bulkdeliver() inside SMTPDirect.py (a little more complicated if you want to do it just for one domain though -- you'd want to test for something like "if 'xemacs.org' in mlist.host_name") > Agreed. For a number of reasons, I think this information can be > useful. As I mentioned elsewhere, the Resent-Message-Id field can be > used to supply a UUID that we can trust (eg, for constructing > canonical archive URLs). Unlike the Received headers, these are > readable by humans who aren't wall-eyed, helpful in tracing delays, > for example. It's an intersting idea. -Barry
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org 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/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp
