spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: Resent- header fields

2005-05-29 09:48:59

On Sun, 29 May 2005, wayne wrote:

In 
<Pine(_dot_)LNX(_dot_)4(_dot_)62(_dot_)0505290759040(_dot_)15027(_at_)sokol(_dot_)elan(_dot_)net>
 "william(at)elan.net" <william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net> writes:

Ok, the demonstration with mail lists did not worked quite as I would have
liked - mxcomp list-processor stripped off the Resent- header fields
and spf-discuss did not let the mail through at all (probably is doing
checking on return-path and saw it was not the one I signed up with,
even though From and everything else is correct).

The reason that spf-discuss rejected your email is because it had
already seen the message-id.  Or, at least, that's what the list admin
interface claimed.  I tried to send it to the list anyway, but it
didn't appear to work.

Ahh - but the new message-id was there too - in the Resent field :)
 Resent-Message-ID: 
<Pine(_dot_)LNX(_dot_)4(_dot_)62(_dot_)0505290739310(_dot_)15027(_at_)sokol(_dot_)elan(_dot_)net>

But I suspect list processor is right, if the message is resent, its
the same as original and if list is set to reject multiple copies
being sent to the list, its appropriate to reject resent if original
message already been seen by the list.

I'm more unhappy about mxcomp stripping off the Resent fields when
processing the message - that was totally not appropriate. But I wonder
if that may have happened because the fields were added to the buttom
and below existing List- fields. So its possible it was not on purpose.
Somebody whose mail client adds the Resent- fields on top can try to test.

--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>