Tony Finch wrote:
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Dave Crocker wrote:
For one thing, why is modification of the return path required?
If delivery to one of the recipients fails, does the sender want to know,
and if they do know, what are they going to do about it?
The only people that can do anything about bounces are the list managers
Actually, that not 100% correct. While true about fixing the list problem, it
does not deal with the problem that a particular message did not get delivered.
In some environments, it is deemed more important for an original author to
know that there message did not get fully delivered, than to notify the list
admin of the problem.
With immediate notification of non-delivery, an original author can choose
alternate ways to get the message delivered. For time-sensitive messages,
this is an important capability.
(or their automated agent), so the bounces should go to them. The only
time you can get away with leaving the return path is if the only senders
to the list are the list admins - but in that case changing it does no
harm and is better for consistency.
Note that my scenario does not expect or require that the notification involve
the list admin. It helps, but isn't required.
This reasoning also applies to fan-out aliases, which is why you need to
be careful about when you use them. Linear aliases are much safer.