|
Sender: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 7 Aug 2001 23:04:28 -0400 |
Reply-To: |
|
Content-type: |
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII |
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-transfer-encoding: |
7BIT |
From: |
|
A few weeks ago I raised this issue and Dennis Hickman sent a complete
copy of what the list owner gets when Subscription = By Owner. On
rereading it I have one question ...
The message has both of these items in it (taken from Dennis's example
posted here):
> You can, at your discretion, send the following command to
> [log in to unmask] to add this person to the list:
>
> ADD CETEFL-L [log in to unmask] Irene Lavingxxx
And:
> PS: In order to facilitate the task, this message has been
> specially formatted so that you only need to forward it back to
> [log in to unmask] and fill in the password below to have the command
> executed. Note that while the formats produced by the forwarding
> function of most mail packages are supported, replying will seldom
> work, so make sure to forward and not reply.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> // JOB PW=XXXXXXXX
> ADD CETEFL-L [log in to unmask] Irene Lavingxxx
> // EOJ
Are these two different ways of doing the same thing, or is the latter
part intended to expand on the former? If I simply send the ADD command
without the JOB syntax, what happens? Does Listserv assume it is OK
because it came from the owner's email address (in which case a spoofed
From: line would fool it)? Reject it because it does not have the job
syntax? Or accept it with, or without, confirmation back to me?
Thanks ...
-----
Tom Rawson [log in to unmask]
|
|
|