[Top] [All Lists]

Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?

2008-05-20 16:38:57

On Tue, 20 May 2008, John Levine wrote:
The advice in 3834 to send vacation responses to the bounce address
was already dubious in 2004, since by then there was lots of list
management software that interpreted anything sent back to a VERP
address as a bounce.

If you're going to cast doubt on the choice of the envelope sender address, perhaps you could describe what you think the right choice is.

I should mention that the behavior you describe, where the vacation notice goes to the list management software which then treats it as a bounce sounds like the Right Thing to me, both because the vacation notice is *NOT* going to the person who sent the message to the list and because it may result in the user being dropped from the list...which may drive someone to correct the vacation configuration so that it doesn't respond to list messages!

Philip Guenther