It is rumored that on or about 2002-07-16 10:41 PM -0500, Jeff Folk wrote as follows: >Delivery was probably accomplished through a BCC. > >> 2. >> Since I see this happening only with SPAM mail, can't this be >> used for another spam protection mechanism? >> >There are a lot of uses for BCC. A mail group in your address book that has >the option of hiding recipient addresses is one. Some list servers use this >mechanism as well.
I am using ListStar and it definitely uses BCC to deliver to the lists. As far as I know, most list servers use this method so that they can make a single connection to a remote host to deliver all of the mail for it. Very time and bandwidth efficient. It also protects the privacy of list subscribers. I went a looked at a bunch of mail I had received to see just what the headers said. It looks like any mail destined for a *single* address in my domain has the SIMS-added <for userxxxx> token, but mail addressed to *several* addresses in my domain does not have the token. Any theories as to why this might be true are welcomed ... Bouncing mail based on this behavior would seem to rule out getting anything from ListStar and possibly any other list server. Does anyone have 2 subscriptions to this list in the same domain? Can you see what the received header says? -- Neil Neil Herber, RGD Corporate info at http://www.eton.ca/ Eton Systems, 15 Pinepoint Drive, Nepean, ON, Canada K2H 6B1 Tel: (613) 829-4668 ############################################################# This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Send administrative queries to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
