[Apologies for duplicates, if any. List issues and decided to Cc
ietf-822 and ietf-smtp.]
On 12/1/07 at 3:30 PM +0000, John Levine wrote:
> RFC 2822 section 3.6.2 describes originator fields. By my reading
> it is pretty clear that a list should add a Sender: field with the
> list's name since it's the list that's sending the mail.
Uh.....not by my reading. Lists add List-* fields (RFC 2369, RFC
2919) if they want to indicate something. Fields in the original
message should be preserved as-is.
> Section 3.6.6 describes resent headers. One could make a plausible
> argument that a list should add a Resent-Sender: rather than a
> Sender: but it's reasonable to do it either way.
Mailing lists using Resent-* fields gives me the willies. Resent-*
fields were intended for MUAs resending mail. They weren't intended
for mailing lists.
Rathole alert.
The question of what mailing lists should or should not do to message headers
in general and originator fields in particular has been one of the most hotly
debated topics in email over the years, and I've seen no indication that any
consensus has formed around a particular position.
The working that was chartered some years back to attempt to deal with this
self-destructed.
Plenty of people (like Pete, apparently) believe that mailing lists should not
mess around with originator headers at all, ever. There was a time when this
position was so prevalent that the operators of mailing list expanders
routinely got flamed for operating in any other way.
Others believe that it is perfectly OK for mailing lists to insert Sender:
fields. There's even a school of thought that says a From: should be inserted
(haven't seen too many proponents of that one since 2822 came out, but it may
still exist).
I don't recall anyone considering using Resent- fields for this until just now,
but I could easily have missed it - these debates frequently have descended
into nasty personal attacks, causing me to tune out.
Speaking as an implementor of mailing list software, I've long since given up
trying to tell people how this should be configured. As a result our software
lets people do whatever they want in this regard. And that's exactly what
people do - whatever they want.
My personal opinion is that a rule either way on originator field issue would
be better than the current situation. But I also think it is unlikely that
consensus can be reached on one.
Ned
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html