On Tue, Mar 02, 1999 at 08:42:02PM -0500, James Smallacombe wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Mar 1999, Mate Wierdl wrote:
>
> > On 3 Mar 1999, D. J. Bernstein wrote:
> >
> > > > Also: is it possible to rewrite the Return-Path header
> > > > and not touch the From header?
> > >
> > > No. Why would a user want that?
> >
> > Well, for one, a user that's subscribed to an ezmlm mailing list that has
> > posts restricted to subscribers might want to be able to post from
> > envelope sender "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" as well as
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] this has been driving alot of people nuts.
> >
> > So then why not rewrite the From: header as well. The messages are
> > sent to the envelope address anyways.
>
> Sorry, I just don't follow you here...
Original header
return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Joe is subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED], so want
return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
so what is wrong with
return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > BTWY, under ezmlm-idx, it is possible to use several envelope
> > addresses using allow.
>
> This does not scale when you're admin'ing dozens of lists with thousands
> of subscribers, as I am.
You are not maintaining allow---users send a message to an appropriate
address.
---
Mate Wierdl | Dept. of Math. Sciences | University of Memphis
