On Fri, Jul 14, 2000 at 09:07:19AM -0600,
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2000 at 09:08:45AM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > I took a look at it any it seems pretty nice. However around here we
> > still use reflectors on the main mailservers and having a check for
> > the recipient's address in the recipient headers is needed. I don't
> > know if enough other people need that check to make it worthwhile doing.
>
> I don't understand. What do you mean by a reflector? Why are checks on
> the recipient's address in the headers necessary?
Reflectors are something sendmail has. You can have system wide aliases
that just deliver the message to more addresses. The alias can actually
point to file. For these kinds of messages, the tests you are using
won't see the mail as list mail.
If you don't mind not responding to bcc'd messages, checking for the
recipient's address(es) in the headers is a very good way to detect
mass mailings.
Making this kind of test does add some complications. You need to have
a list of addresses for the current recipient. You have to worry about
equivalent addresses that are too numerous to list manually (typically
this would be case insignificance and extension addresses).
