> OK, I see what you are saying now, and think it's a good idea. Ooh. Thankee.
> I had mistakenly thought you were advocating letting the user determine > where auto-replies would be directed through a header, instead of > always replying to the envelope sender address. > > Does the following jive with what you had in mind? > > Change TMDA so that if an incoming message contains an ``X-TMDA-From'' > header, it will CONFIRM_APPEND that address instead of the Return-Path > address when the message is confirmed. Yup. > Also, change TMDA so that it checks the address in ``X-TMDA-From'' > against FILTER_INCOMING along with the envelope sender, From and > Reply-To. Yup. Or just that address if it is present. Your call. > Essentially this just gives the user a mechanism to specify what > address he prefers be whitelisted. > > This should allow me to send fully 'dated' mail if I want, yet still > get ``[EMAIL PROTECTED]'' added to other TMDA user's whitelists. Now > the problem discussed in FAQ 4.5 is a non-issue. Precisely! :) > ``X-TMDA-From'' is just an example name, it could be made more general > so that other C/R systems could adopt it. Exactly. Should I elaborate on part two of that original post (i.e. a safe method for doing auto-confirms between TMDA users), or would that be of interest? P.S. Thanks for posting the link to the -gui list on -workers and for signing us up to gmane. I meant to do that (announce the link), but didn't get around to it. <sheepish grin> Gre7g. ================================================================= Gre7g Luterman [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.templeofluna.com/ Stay informed: http://www.templeofluna.com/keeper/mailinglist.htm Into each wound, a little salt must fall... _________________________________________________ tmda-workers mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-workers
