>>>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