>>>How about using the USENET keyword of NEWSGROUP: and making that a > >I believe that Eric added the definition at Thomas Habernoll's >request so as to simplify the Listserv/Netnews gateway project we >are working on. The idea is that mail sent by Listserv would >have a 'Newsgroup' header so that netnews gateways could direct >them into the appropriate group (creating a Usenet 'Newsgroups' >header). Wouldn't using the definition for something else break >this? I'm getting confused here. I thought the original start of this discussion was that LISTSERV is misusing the Sender: header field by placing the list name there, instead of a person to whom rejection notices could be sent. That's why we need a Newsgroup: header (or whatever it's called). Surely no one is proposing creating a Newsgroup header so rejection notices can be sent back to it. Summary: 1. LISTSERV should change it's current (mis)usage of the Sender: header and use Newsgroup, instead. Irwin, would having a listname@address be a problem for your Netnews gateway? I would guess not, since you won't be having mail going through the gateway from more than one server of a group of peers. 2. LISTSERV should then start filling in the Sender: field with the address of some human (a list owner, presumably) to whom to send rejection notices. Richard