"Ronald F. Guilmette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> In the first place, no, I think you are confused about that.  Ever
> hear of Majordomo?  No?

Yes, I have, and Majordomo also uses 'Precedence: bulk' for both its
multiple recipient messages as well as its single recipient messages.

> In the second place, I think that you just proved my point for me.
> Yea, sure, *mailing list messages* should be labeled with
> "Precedence: bulk", because they _are_ bulk messages that get sent
> to MANY recipients.
>
> But that wasn't what we were discussing, now was it?
>
> We _were_ talking about one-shot auto-response messages.

You aren't paying attention.  List managers send out multiple
recipient messages such as when distributing a list post.  They also
send out single recipient auto-responses (like TMDA does) such as when
responding to a help request.  In both cases, Majordomo and Mailman
both use 'Precedence: bulk', not 'junk'.  Have you filed a bug
report with these projects as well?

> Nobody has ever put forward any reason why null envelope sender
> addresses MUST be used

No one has said MUST.  The IETF draft says MAY, and TMDA only deploys
MAY.

>>Next, no one has objected to the clause in the draft that allows use
>>of <> during a year or so of discussion and review on the ietf-822
>>mailing list.
>
> I haven't because I have been busy on other things.

How convenient.

> But if you want me to, I will.

I could really care less what you do actually.  This is your holy war.

> Why didn't this clown at least have the good sense to run his draft
> past the people on the spamtools list before submitting it?

It is a draft concerning the general behavior of auto-responders; it
isn't specific to spam.  It was submitted to the relevant groups and
discussed extensively on those groups over a long period of time.

> Anyway, with respect to e-mail, the IETF doesn't call the shots
> anymore.  Microsoft and AOL do.  The IETF is largely irrelevant at
> this point.

Unbelievable.

Anyway, the rest of your message is unconstructive, insulting and
baseless, and I won't be baited by it.
_____________________________________________
tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users

Reply via email to