>> no, all we have to do is register some additonal defined headers as defined
>> in the standard.  Lets not have the kind of fights that go on for
>> new versions of standards.
>
>If we define REJECT-TO as an additional header, will that OBLIGATE mailers
>to use it to be in conformance?  I think not.  For an optional header it
>would have to be the NEWSGROUP or LIST-NAME idea.
>
It would obligate mailers who want to state they are RFC822 conforming to
not barf when they see it because RFC822 clearly provides for the registration
of new headers.  Whether it utilizes it or not cannot be enforced, but what
else is new?
 
>Next, what goes on the SENDER header?  LISTSERV itself?  Reject notices might
>some day look like commands and come from addresses that look like users.
>As long as no standard exists on how to send a notice of nondelivery, we
>can expect just about anything.
 
I think that we need to make sure that the set of new headers make it possible
for SENDER to be set to list owner.  This means only a few sets of software
need to be changed to take advantage of the new headers.  Since I would
expect that the rules would be to simply place the new headers higher in the
list of where to store incoming mail (for a list-group header) or where to
send rejection, ack notices.
                            -phil