On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 15:23 +0200, johnp wrote:
You seem to be confusing mail-lists and forwarding. The two scenarios are
They are different, but there are massive similarities. What makes you
think I'm confused? Did you also think I was confusing IP routing and
forwarding when I mentioned that? Or do you have the same problem as
Terry has with analogy?
When I join a mail-list I am aware of the fact that the headers will
be adjusted to suit the mail-list. If I don't like that I can choose
to not join the list. That is a totally different thing to a forwarder
forging my domain without my knowledge or consent.
When you post mail to an address on the Internet, outside your own local
domain, you know perfectly well that it _might_ be one of the millions
of addresses which actually get forwarded to a real mailbox elsewhere.
If you don't like that, then you can choose not to post to addresses on
I could just as well argue that the _mailing list_ is 'forging' my name
without my knowledge or consent. Yes, if I have a modicum of clue I
should have _known_ it was going to happen. It's always been like that
and I'd be silly to think I could change it. And the same goes for
I haven't argued that normal forwarding is necessarily a good thing. If
you want to impose a massive change to the status quo, the overriding
reasons definitely need to come from your side. I'm merely observing
that you're tilting at windmills if you ask the world to change _just_
to work around flaws in your original design, in the absence of any good
reason why it was broken in the _first_ place.
Basically you are wrong. Forwarding without sender rewriting is
forgery and will die in due time.
I await the replacement for RFC2822, and the ubiquitous deployment of
SRS, with eager anticipation. Good luck with that windmill :)