[GRLUG] "From" adresses
Grand Rapids Linux Users Group
grlug at grlug.org
Mon Apr 8 11:30:12 EDT 2019
On 4/8/19 11:25 AM, Grand Rapids Linux Users Group wrote:
> On 4/8/19 10:21 AM, Grand Rapids Linux Users Group wrote:
>>> This is the only list I'm on that does this, though. I can't imagine
>>> this is uncommon. What I'm used to seeing is listserv software that
>>> adds a "Reply-To" header and leaves "From" the same as in the
>>> original inbound message, usually with an "In-Reply-To" reference
>>> from a previous message so e-mail clients can keep thread hierarchy
>>> straight. The GRLUG list did this until hosting was moved, and I
>>> don't remember any problems with that - take a look at messages prior
>>> to February for examples ofhow the headers worked. So I think it
>>> could be made to work.
>> The world has changed; for the worse, IMNSHO, but it has none the
>> Several LARGE proprietary mail solutions have added restrictions on e-
>> mail that is breaking the traditional operation of listservs in order
>> to [theoretically] deal with SPAM and Malware [distributed and
>> autonomous solutions are also more difficult to monetize, so there's
>> Possibly the gecos portion of the address could be left unaltered? - if
>> the maillist software supports it; but the "From:" has to work for SPF,
>> DKIM, etc... or the message will be ash-canned.
>> Note: I am not the list admin. And as the list admin is not paid
>> he|she|they should only be thanked for their efforts.
>> P.S. With the ever expanding "innovative" collaboration platform of
>> the month club I've come to really miss NNTP/Usenet.
> Oh, I agree. This list has been maintained in working order for years,
> and that is quite commendable. Whether this input is taken or not, it's
> still an excellent service to the community.
> GRLUG doesn't have a published DMARC record, and we don't appear to have
> an SPF policy, either. Which means the only thing we've got is senders
> sending DKIM-signed messages, which unless they're re-signed by the
> listserv software (which it doesn't do, and I get an empty result
> querying for pubkeys, so it can't), are only valid if the From address
> *doesn't* get changed, provided they've signed the From header. So all
> in all, I suspect we'd actually *improve* our ability to get through
> filters if we reverted to the way it worked 3 months ago.
> Warm Regards,
> Kyle Maas
Actually, thinking about it, the listserv adds a footer at the bottom of
messages, so DKIM signatures would need to be stripped anyway or they'll
mismatch regardless of fiddling with From, so maybe that's a moot
point. So it would probably not improve things to change the From
behavior, but I doubt it would hurt.
More information about the grlug