Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sat, 18 Feb 1995 19:22:23 CST |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Sat, 18 Feb 1995 06:39:08 +0100 Eric Thomas said:
>This isn't about RFCs, it is about preventing mailing loops. It is
>perfectly legitimate to include header lines in the body of your reply.
>The problem is that there are thousands of mail systems that don't follow
>the RFCs and don't send delivery errors to the right address. They send
>them back to the list. Your options are to call each of these sites and
>talk them into fixing their mail programs, or use a loop detector that
>identifies the delivery errors. Unfortunately it can't tell a delivery
>error from the replies your usenet reader is generating. If you add
>"Loopcheck= NoBody" to the list header, he and the broken mailers will be
>allowed to post.
Actually, that's where this question orginated (but I bet you guessed
that). I've been talking to one of the maintainers of ANU-NEWS (a VMS
Usenet program), and have been unable to convince him to have his
program simply add the correct E-mail header lines to the Usenet headers
when a post is delivered to a moderated group. I had no such trouble
with the author of trn, btw (who gave me the instructions to pass on
to trn admin. to fix their software).
It's my gut feeling that more and more Listserv lists will be mirrored
by Usenet groups. This problem (of bad looking posts and error messages)
will only get worse.
Changing the "Loopcheck= NoBody" will help some, but that means I still
have to edit the post by hand and clean it up before I send it out. The
REAL solution remains getting these newsprogram writers to do it right.
Anyone have a good argument or suggestion for how to convince them
to fix it?
------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Barnes (409) 846-3273 (home)
[log in to unmask] (409) 845-9520 (work)
If you want to make life easier for novice computer users, do NOT give
them a restricted menu. A restricted menu is simply the lazy way to
avoid teaching them what they really need to know in the first place.
|
|
|