no comment
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Return-Path: <>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 29893 invoked from network); 12 May 1999 11:26:25 -0000
Received: from kerberos2.troja.mff.cuni.cz (195.113.28.3)
by argo.troja.mff.cuni.cz with SMTP; 12 May 1999 11:26:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 15788 invoked from network); 12 May 1999 11:26:24 -0000
Received: from muncher.math.uic.edu (131.193.178.181)
by argo.troja.mff.cuni.cz with SMTP; 12 May 1999 11:26:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 204 invoked for bounce); 12 May 1999 11:25:58 -0000
Date: 12 May 1999 11:25:58 -0000
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: failure notice
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at muncher.math.uic.edu.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
ezmlm-send: fatal: this message is looping: it already has my Delivered-To line
(#5.4.6)
--- Below this line is a copy of the message.
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: (qmail 7267 invoked from network); 12 May 1999 11:25:57 -0000
Received: from chromium.singnet.com.sg (HELO chromium.mcis.singnet.com.sg)
(165.21.74.3)
by muncher.math.uic.edu with SMTP; 12 May 1999 11:25:57 -0000
Received: from mail pickup service by chromium.mcis.singnet.com.sg with Microsoft
SMTPSVC;
Wed, 12 May 1999 19:24:44 +0800
Received: from xenon.singnet.com.sg ([165.21.74.26]) by chromium.mcis.singnet.com.sg
with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1875.115.11);
Wed, 12 May 1999 16:53:03 +0800
Received: from muncher.math.uic.edu (muncher.math.uic.edu [131.193.178.181])
by xenon.singnet.com.sg (8.9.2/8.9.2) with SMTP id QAA28370
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 12 May 1999 16:54:17 +0800 (SST)
Received: (qmail 9426 invoked by uid 1002); 12 May 1999 08:53:15 -0000
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 28074 invoked from network); 12 May 1999 08:53:14 -0000
Received: from kerberos2.troja.mff.cuni.cz (195.113.28.3)
by muncher.math.uic.edu with SMTP; 12 May 1999 08:53:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 13870 invoked from network); 12 May 1999 08:53:32 -0000
Received: from argo.troja.mff.cuni.cz (195.113.28.11)
by muncher.math.uic.edu with SMTP; 12 May 1999 08:53:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 27801 invoked by uid 501); 12 May 1999 08:53:32 -0000
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 10:53:32 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Pavel Kankovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Fundamental flaws in List-Unsubscribe
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 11 May 1999, D. J. Bernstein wrote:
> What the MUA should do is find the most recent subscription confirmation
> from the SOS list, and follow the instructions in _that_ message. This
> is why I proposed putting a List-ID field into every message; it lets
> the MUA reliably keep track of the latest information for each list.
I can't resist the temptation...
What happens when List-ID is out of date? (Even if changing the id is
strongly discouraged, nothing in the world can prevent it. According to
Murphy's laws, this means some change WILL happen.) What happens if the
instructions in the most recent message the user has received (!= the most
recent message sent) are out of date? :)
--Pavel Kankovsky aka Peak [ Boycott Microsoft--http://www.vcnet.com/bms ]
"NSA GCHQ KGB CIA nuclear conspiration war weapon spy agent... Hi Echelon!"
