On 10 October 1998, Aaron Schrab <aaron+pf(_at_)schrab(_dot_)com> wrote:
At 22:20 +0300 10 Oct 1998, Liviu Daia
<daia(_at_)stoilow(_dot_)imar(_dot_)ro> wrote:
I second this. Messages to "daia(_at_)stoilow(_dot_)imar(_dot_)ro" and
"daia(_at_)imar(_dot_)ro" will go to different machines. When I instruct a
MLM to subscribe me at the first address, I expect to receive mail
there, not at the second.
Of course messages should go to the address that you used to subscribe
to the list. But, for a lot of people it would be good if either form
would work for sending messages to a restricted list, or possibly for
unsubscribing. And, that's all that the patch to multigram would do,
it wouldn't change the addresses to which messages are sent.
You miss the point. Assume that, for some weird reasons, I want to
subscribe with both addresses. Assume also that, a few weeks later, I
want to unsubscribe "daia(_at_)imar(_dot_)ro", but keep receiving messages at
the
first address. With the patch, both operations won't do what I expect.
The right way to do what you suggest would be to allow commands like
subscribe <list> <address>
and use cryptographic cookies for authentication (again, "subscribe"
here is only an example, it could be replaced by any MLM command).
Automatically aliasing addresses that are not the same is IMHO a Bad
Thing [TM], no matter what noble purposes you have in mind when you do
it.
Regards,
Liviu
--
Dr. Liviu Daia e-mail: daia(_at_)stoilow(_dot_)imar(_dot_)ro
Institute of Mathematics web page: http://www.imar.ro/~daia
of the Romanian Academy PGP key: finger
daia(_at_)stoilow(_dot_)imar(_dot_)ro