Samuel Sieb: > > There are certain providers who have spam protection settings that cause > > problems with mailing lists. I assume yours is one of them. For email > > addresses with those providers, the mailing list rewrites the From to be > > from the mailing list and puts your original email address as the CC. Jeffrey Walton: > Small nit... It is not the job of mailing list software to rewrite > headers for a mailing list. In fact, it breaks SPF and DKIM, and > violates the RFCs. Specifically, RFC 5322. A mailing list can't forward on someone else's post without breaking those things, no more than I could forward a perfect example of an authentic message from you without it failing subsequent checks. Those checks can only work with the first poster. Or, to put that in another way. *My* SMTP server is not an authorised agent to send *your* mail. And attempting to do so would end up with your mail being consigned to the spam sin-bin on many systems. For some third party to forward on your message, that third party has to become the sender. And the email sanity checks for non-spam (SPF, DKIM, whatever else) have to *now* check the validity of the third party (the mailing list) as being authentic. And all of us have to rely on the mailing list doing similar checks on the message that they were going to forward on, before it does so. > If someone signs up for a mailing list, then the member is expected to > receive the communications from the list. If the member does not want > the communications, then the member should run local filters or leave > the list. And if the member wants different behavior for "Reply" and > "Reply-To-All" for a mailing list, then the member should configure > their MUA accordingly. > > Also see Tolerating Mailing-List Modifications, > <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-chuang-mailing-list-modifications-04.html>. That's one hell of a RFC to try and parse. Not to mention that it's a draft, a self-declared opinionated one, and not a rule about how mailing lists (should) work. There's been plenty of flame wars over the decades of whether a mailing list should forward its received mail as from the poster with a reply- to back to the list, or not. And there's plenty of evidence that if a list doesn't pre-load the reply-to with the list's address, most of the replies will only go back to the original poster. Replies back to the poster, and only the poster, would work well for a mother's list who wanted to find a babysitter for the weekend. But for a technical discussion list it's far more useful to keep conversations on the list. And for the list server to add in the reply-to address is generally the best way to manage that. While the original poster could do that before they posted, few would remember, few would know how, some won't even have the option, and few would bother. And it's certainly not an action you'd expect each recipient to do (configure their mailer to reply differently to messages in some particular folder, and most mail agents only give you an option to preselect a different FROM address for specific folder, if they even give you that, but no different REPLY-TO address). Without that address insertion you end up with a list where there's dozens of people asking the same questions, over and over, and there's no public replies answering them. A side effect of that is you have no idea what responses people have received, if any. They could get 50 emails in response, they could get none. They could deliberately dangerous advice from hackers. They could get stupid advice from the clueless. They could get advice that would benefit 100 other people, too. With this list, and many others, the general expectation is that you post to the list, people reply to the list, and you don't privately reply to someone unless it's specially requested or warranted. And my mailer, at least, does easily allow me to REPLY (privately) or REPLY GROUP (back to the list, or all addresses listed in TO and CC fields). Though, for my money, USENET was far better for this kind of thing than this mailing list or web forums. You could post without exposing any FROM address to spammers. Usenet's caching meant you didn't have to download all messages, just the ones you read (superior to IMAP). And there were a few really good news agents (as well as some really bad ones, like Outlook was and probably still is). -- uname -rsvp Linux 3.10.0-1160.119.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Jun 4 14:43:51 UTC 2024 x86_64 Boilerplate: All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted. I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list. -- _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
