lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20040320031350.GA4385@wolff.to> From: bruno at wolff.to (Bruno Wolff III) Subject: Administrivia (very OT, but should be addressed) On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 19:55:01 -0500, Cael Abal <lists2@...you.com> wrote: > > Bruno, did you read the objections raised in that link I provided? I > know how Mail-Followup-To works. I also understand there are unresolved > problems with it. My argument was that it was better than not using it. It isn't a perfect solution. > > This will be my last post on the subject, but please consider that MFT > is *not* a standard (and as far as I know hasn't shown up in an RFC > since the late '90s), supported by only a handful of MUAs... And the > (default), polite course of action has historically been not to CC folks > in mailinglist posts. I disagree that not cc'ing senders is the default in general. I think it depends on the kind of list, and the ones I use it is typically preferred that you cc senders unless they indicate that they shouldn't be using a mail-followup-to header.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists