[mailing list] No Reply-To in messages?
Hi, Sometimes I can see messages from the mailing list that have no Reply-To header. For example, this is the headers from a recent email from the ML: Delivered-To: andrey.semashev@gmail.com Received: by 10.223.171.174 with SMTP id s43csp1184445wrc; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 04:54:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.233.239.75 with SMTP id d72mr28079608qkg.313.1490097251746; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 04:54:11 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <andrey.a.davydov@gmail.com> Received: from mail-qk0-x233.google.com (mail-qk0-x233.google.com. [2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 5si5329794qty.259.2017.03.21.04.54.11 for <andrey.semashev@gmail.com> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Mar 2017 04:54:11 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of andrey.a.davydov@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of andrey.a.davydov@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=andrey.a.davydov@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: by mail-qk0-x233.google.com with SMTP id y76so54702989qkb.0 for <andrey.semashev@gmail.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 04:54:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Az1Qy0ABDDY/isZXuI8r58lTLTG+E/wp0e0IliVZOAk=; b=oPSYU2baFZEWMUKF/s2hay278FTdFBfitQp4TNz5piq0zMWNqePuZaXbUD5SPP0Cnp He9gQzhynjuN/Lf4fpUtqjOWyntF2BSSrdpYbCSmaWnnSQjTz5s53EkOSVgojqHCfmVr A3CSJNK5QdAwkNAm+JQRIShSRO/YpWtK90Lhoa9lKlWF+JtIMwCgFG3h5vN1vw+W1xAB pNoHymY5rZ7Uh0WUHMlpEF/tmkD/tZzDss++3j/lKZNgX66VefCpi510BjKKkFfU2xdy zBba1I5hOOohBUzhlkYf5fSxZ1BkC6FSOizONZr1Mlx8AXLhl2MvmfW6KtR9nt9rjmSa Sfhw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Az1Qy0ABDDY/isZXuI8r58lTLTG+E/wp0e0IliVZOAk=; b=OAFamTGJr76H6gmaG7LGcCRyHIp+Kj1SEs188yLqxEQGCvhYYdB8wMs6GsOYL0wYSY 9M1gYeXwexivqs+WF5Reg9CCh2mnkCUWTM6nSu9/B05sXFBUL/sVyEr7OuSXJpzVqOxl cZorectxLhbWqIqClTxYjSDNDKPJB9n+3OntHKp5l2gJY3mMPaILXbXRh6XXCMHxpYIy w1um18ndeJ0Ed7/nkhGKlzD2HvyPpkVPhjM+hhWmb+lxnVNhbpBFsoor28Yx5arAnVWb 0JndOFeqB3tfjv9DA5x/kuSStkSuG2Q439Fvd/2UuWKsqaR4JhaBejrE7jEnJgrN69on 8wfQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H24Tvn8HI3rOm/9DXmcPc8Hok/lT3XOC2lfnuuWDiN5TsbtV56nLqNTPypggKQsasFDZvOER50I+HaBMH84 X-Received: by 10.55.15.195 with SMTP id 64mr28730703qkp.131.1490097251370; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 04:54:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.157.129 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 04:54:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <14065012-bde4-142d-eedf-b5fbf1f51d91@gmail.com> References: <CAN1iZb7pGGaFe9OKyDKxMB0Nryiqa3pxk5hLQY+1ybUCMNrZBQ@mail.gmail.com> <D5F339D7-3F03-4363-A2A5-F611FE8C76F0@gmail.com> <CAN1iZb54emhE_G9McfCmO2nN6D-qWqQSgSC-w1HdRqCAh08c8Q@mail.gmail.com> <14065012-bde4-142d-eedf-b5fbf1f51d91@gmail.com> From: Andrey Davydov <andrey.a.davydov@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 14:54:10 +0300 Message-ID: <CAN1iZb6VHEUJvt9h8JN_1EubOcYponiEjdXWQGcGZ+VjU_hKJA@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [boost] [smart_ptr] Is there any interest in unique_ptr with type erased deleter? To: boost@lists.boost.org Cc: Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1146f4805976ff054b3c4d27 As a result, when I press Reply, the reply is addressed to the original email sender instead of the mailing list, which is really easy to miss before sending the message. Is it possible to ensure that every email from the ML contains boost@lists.boost.org in its Reply-To header? PS: I'm not a guru in email protocols, so if there is another more appropriate way of doing this then that would be fine with me.
On 3/21/2017 9:24 AM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
Hi,
Sometimes I can see messages from the mailing list that have no Reply-To header. For example, this is the headers from a recent email from the ML:
Maybe you should explain how you are interacting with the mailing list. For instance I interact with the mailing list by responding to the GMane newsgroup 'gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel' using Thunderbird ( on Windows 7 or 8.1 and occasionally on various Linux distros ). Then someone who is doing what you are doing with the same e-mail software you are using under the same OS has a somewhat better chance to help you.
Delivered-To: andrey.semashev@gmail.com Received: by 10.223.171.174 with SMTP id s43csp1184445wrc; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 04:54:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.233.239.75 with SMTP id d72mr28079608qkg.313.1490097251746; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 04:54:11 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <andrey.a.davydov@gmail.com> Received: from mail-qk0-x233.google.com (mail-qk0-x233.google.com. [2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 5si5329794qty.259.2017.03.21.04.54.11 for <andrey.semashev@gmail.com> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Mar 2017 04:54:11 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of andrey.a.davydov@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of andrey.a.davydov@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=andrey.a.davydov@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: by mail-qk0-x233.google.com with SMTP id y76so54702989qkb.0 for <andrey.semashev@gmail.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 04:54:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Az1Qy0ABDDY/isZXuI8r58lTLTG+E/wp0e0IliVZOAk=;
b=oPSYU2baFZEWMUKF/s2hay278FTdFBfitQp4TNz5piq0zMWNqePuZaXbUD5SPP0Cnp
He9gQzhynjuN/Lf4fpUtqjOWyntF2BSSrdpYbCSmaWnnSQjTz5s53EkOSVgojqHCfmVr
A3CSJNK5QdAwkNAm+JQRIShSRO/YpWtK90Lhoa9lKlWF+JtIMwCgFG3h5vN1vw+W1xAB
pNoHymY5rZ7Uh0WUHMlpEF/tmkD/tZzDss++3j/lKZNgX66VefCpi510BjKKkFfU2xdy
zBba1I5hOOohBUzhlkYf5fSxZ1BkC6FSOizONZr1Mlx8AXLhl2MvmfW6KtR9nt9rjmSa Sfhw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Az1Qy0ABDDY/isZXuI8r58lTLTG+E/wp0e0IliVZOAk=;
b=OAFamTGJr76H6gmaG7LGcCRyHIp+Kj1SEs188yLqxEQGCvhYYdB8wMs6GsOYL0wYSY
9M1gYeXwexivqs+WF5Reg9CCh2mnkCUWTM6nSu9/B05sXFBUL/sVyEr7OuSXJpzVqOxl
cZorectxLhbWqIqClTxYjSDNDKPJB9n+3OntHKp5l2gJY3mMPaILXbXRh6XXCMHxpYIy
w1um18ndeJ0Ed7/nkhGKlzD2HvyPpkVPhjM+hhWmb+lxnVNhbpBFsoor28Yx5arAnVWb
0JndOFeqB3tfjv9DA5x/kuSStkSuG2Q439Fvd/2UuWKsqaR4JhaBejrE7jEnJgrN69on 8wfQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H24Tvn8HI3rOm/9DXmcPc8Hok/lT3XOC2lfnuuWDiN5TsbtV56nLqNTPypggKQsasFDZvOER50I+HaBMH84
X-Received: by 10.55.15.195 with SMTP id 64mr28730703qkp.131.1490097251370; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 04:54:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.157.129 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 04:54:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <14065012-bde4-142d-eedf-b5fbf1f51d91@gmail.com> References: <CAN1iZb7pGGaFe9OKyDKxMB0Nryiqa3pxk5hLQY+1ybUCMNrZBQ@mail.gmail.com> <D5F339D7-3F03-4363-A2A5-F611FE8C76F0@gmail.com> <CAN1iZb54emhE_G9McfCmO2nN6D-qWqQSgSC-w1HdRqCAh08c8Q@mail.gmail.com> <14065012-bde4-142d-eedf-b5fbf1f51d91@gmail.com> From: Andrey Davydov <andrey.a.davydov@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 14:54:10 +0300 Message-ID: <CAN1iZb6VHEUJvt9h8JN_1EubOcYponiEjdXWQGcGZ+VjU_hKJA@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [boost] [smart_ptr] Is there any interest in unique_ptr with type erased deleter? To: boost@lists.boost.org Cc: Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1146f4805976ff054b3c4d27
As a result, when I press Reply, the reply is addressed to the original email sender instead of the mailing list, which is really easy to miss before sending the message. Is it possible to ensure that every email from the ML contains boost@lists.boost.org in its Reply-To header?
PS: I'm not a guru in email protocols, so if there is another more appropriate way of doing this then that would be fine with me.
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
On 21 March 2017 at 18:53, Edward Diener via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 3/21/2017 9:24 AM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
Hi,
Sometimes I can see messages from the mailing list that have no Reply-To header. For example, this is the headers from a recent email from the ML:
Maybe you should explain how you are interacting with the mailing list. For instance I interact with the mailing list by responding to the GMane newsgroup 'gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel' using Thunderbird ( on Windows 7 or 8.1 and occasionally on various Linux distros ). Then someone who is doing what you are doing with the same e-mail software you are using under the same OS has a somewhat better chance to help you.
The problem is that Andrey was cc'd in the email, which arrived before the email from the mailing list. Both mails have the same message-id, so gmail discards the second one it receives. This means the mailing list software doesn't have a chance to change the headers.
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Daniel James via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 21 March 2017 at 18:53, Edward Diener via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 3/21/2017 9:24 AM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
Hi,
Sometimes I can see messages from the mailing list that have no Reply-To header. For example, this is the headers from a recent email from the ML:
Maybe you should explain how you are interacting with the mailing list. For instance I interact with the mailing list by responding to the GMane newsgroup 'gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel' using Thunderbird ( on Windows 7 or 8.1 and occasionally on various Linux distros ). Then someone who is doing what you are doing with the same e-mail software you are using under the same OS has a somewhat better chance to help you.
The problem is that Andrey was cc'd in the email, which arrived before the email from the mailing list. Both mails have the same message-id, so gmail discards the second one it receives. This means the mailing list software doesn't have a chance to change the headers.
I see. So the problem appears whenever a person does Reply to All, which sends two messages - to the ML and the original author that is specified in CC? But was the older infrastructure adding CC to the messages from the ML? I think it wasn't. Do we need the CC?
AMDG On 03/21/2017 04:05 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Daniel James via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
The problem is that Andrey was cc'd in the email, which arrived before the email from the mailing list. Both mails have the same message-id, so gmail discards the second one it receives. This means the mailing list software doesn't have a chance to change the headers.
I see. So the problem appears whenever a person does Reply to All, which sends two messages - to the ML and the original author that is specified in CC? But was the older infrastructure adding CC to the messages from the ML? I think it wasn't. Do we need the CC?
The From field used to be the sender, but was changed to be the list. Without the CC, the sender's email won't appear anywhere. Besides which, reply all could always cause this issue (and I have observed it occasionally in the past). In Christ, Steven Watanabe
On 21 March 2017 at 16:21, Steven Watanabe via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
AMDG
<snip> In Christ, IMHO we should keep this list a-political and a-religious. Maybe nobody else minds, but I do mind. This list, as far as I understood is about boost and c++, please limit it to that. degski
On 03/22/17 01:21, Steven Watanabe via Boost wrote:
AMDG
On 03/21/2017 04:05 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Daniel James via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
The problem is that Andrey was cc'd in the email, which arrived before the email from the mailing list. Both mails have the same message-id, so gmail discards the second one it receives. This means the mailing list software doesn't have a chance to change the headers.
I see. So the problem appears whenever a person does Reply to All, which sends two messages - to the ML and the original author that is specified in CC? But was the older infrastructure adding CC to the messages from the ML? I think it wasn't. Do we need the CC?
The From field used to be the sender, but was changed to be the list. Without the CC, the sender's email won't appear anywhere. Besides which, reply all could always cause this issue (and I have observed it occasionally in the past).
The sender is still present in the From on my end. Here's what I see in your message: To: boost@lists.boost.org From: Steven Watanabe via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> Reply-To: boost@lists.boost.org Cc: Steven Watanabe <watanabesj@gmail.com> Sender: "Boost" <boost-bounces@lists.boost.org> Your message contains Reply-To, so when I hit Reply the composed message is correctly addressed to boost@lists.boost.org.
On 03/22/17 01:34, Andrey Semashev wrote:
On 03/22/17 01:21, Steven Watanabe via Boost wrote:
AMDG
On 03/21/2017 04:05 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Daniel James via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
The problem is that Andrey was cc'd in the email, which arrived before the email from the mailing list. Both mails have the same message-id, so gmail discards the second one it receives. This means the mailing list software doesn't have a chance to change the headers.
I see. So the problem appears whenever a person does Reply to All, which sends two messages - to the ML and the original author that is specified in CC? But was the older infrastructure adding CC to the messages from the ML? I think it wasn't. Do we need the CC?
The From field used to be the sender, but was changed to be the list. Without the CC, the sender's email won't appear anywhere. Besides which, reply all could always cause this issue (and I have observed it occasionally in the past).
The sender is still present in the From on my end. Here's what I see in your message:
To: boost@lists.boost.org From: Steven Watanabe via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> Reply-To: boost@lists.boost.org Cc: Steven Watanabe <watanabesj@gmail.com> Sender: "Boost" <boost-bounces@lists.boost.org>
Your message contains Reply-To, so when I hit Reply the composed message is correctly addressed to boost@lists.boost.org.
Oh, disregard that. I sent it before I actually read the email address. Sorry.
On 03/22/17 01:21, Steven Watanabe via Boost wrote:
AMDG
On 03/21/2017 04:05 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Daniel James via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
The problem is that Andrey was cc'd in the email, which arrived before the email from the mailing list. Both mails have the same message-id, so gmail discards the second one it receives. This means the mailing list software doesn't have a chance to change the headers.
I see. So the problem appears whenever a person does Reply to All, which sends two messages - to the ML and the original author that is specified in CC? But was the older infrastructure adding CC to the messages from the ML? I think it wasn't. Do we need the CC?
The From field used to be the sender, but was changed to be the list. Without the CC, the sender's email won't appear anywhere. Besides which, reply all could always cause this issue (and I have observed it occasionally in the past).
Still, I've never had this problem with the previous infrastructure. Maybe the email clients tend to not send the second email to the From address when there is Reply-To. For example, the std-discussion and std-proposals mailing lists use this scheme: From: real original sender address To: mailing list address (e.g. "std-discussion@isocpp.org" <std-discussion@isocpp.org>) Reply-To: mailing list address (e.g. std-discussion@isocpp.org) No Cc headers. Can we use this scheme?
AMDG On 03/21/2017 04:55 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
Still, I've never had this problem with the previous infrastructure. Maybe the email clients tend to not send the second email to the From address when there is Reply-To. For example, the std-discussion and std-proposals mailing lists use this scheme:
From: real original sender address To: mailing list address (e.g. "std-discussion@isocpp.org" <std-discussion@isocpp.org>) Reply-To: mailing list address (e.g. std-discussion@isocpp.org)
No Cc headers.
Can we use this scheme?
We used to. Please see http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2016/05/229693.php and https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/boost-steering/EcKn2yA9ip4 In Christ, Steven Watanabe
On 21 March 2017 at 17:10, Steven Watanabe via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
AMDG
<snip>
In Christ, Steven Watanabe
IMHO the boost mailing list should be free of political and/or religious expressions. Maybe nobody else minds, but I do mind (I'm happy to elaborate, if required). Steven, please refrain from expressing your personal beliefs in every mail you send to a mailing list dealing with boost and c++ and limit the contents to those 2 subjects. degski
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 6:19 PM, degski via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 21 March 2017 at 17:10, Steven Watanabe via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
AMDG
<snip>
In Christ, Steven Watanabe
IMHO the boost mailing list should be free of political and/or religious expressions. Maybe nobody else minds, but I do mind (I'm happy to elaborate, if required). Steven, please refrain from expressing your personal beliefs in every mail you send to a mailing list dealing with boost and c++ and limit the contents to those 2 subjects.
We've had that discussion before, multiple times.. And actually I think I started the first one of those. Just chill :-) It's not that important. And think of it on par with the sig lines some people use (looks at his own). And just be happy it's not a 50 line totally irrelevant and un-enforceable legal disclaimer. Now those are something to get upset about ;-) -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
-----Original Message----- From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of degski via Boost Sent: 21 March 2017 23:19 To: boost Cc: degski Subject: Re: [boost] [mailing list] No Reply-To in messages?
On 21 March 2017 at 17:10, Steven Watanabe via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
AMDG
<snip>
In Christ, Steven Watanabe
IMHO the boost mailing list should be free of political and/or religious expressions. Maybe nobody else minds, but I do mind (I'm happy to elaborate, if required). Steven, please refrain from expressing your personal beliefs in every mail you send to a mailing list dealing with boost and c++ and limit the contents to those 2 subjects.
Boost is mostly a tolerant crowd? Paul
Still, I've never had this problem with the previous infrastructure. Maybe the email clients tend to not send the second email to the From address when there is Reply-To. For example, the std-discussion and std-proposals mailing lists use this scheme:
From: real original sender address To: mailing list address (e.g. "std-discussion@isocpp.org" <std-discussion@isocpp.org>) Reply-To: mailing list address (e.g. std-discussion@isocpp.org)
No Cc headers.
Can we use this scheme?
That was the previous scheme which caused the DMARC failure because DMARC won't allow this ML to send email From: an address it does not own. Regarding your problems, I'm on Thunderbird and I'm finding no problem at all with the new ML config. Somebody obviously told Thunderbird about the new munging option for Mailman and it all "just works". The real problem seems to me to be gmail having stupid handling. Niall -- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Niall Douglas via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Still, I've never had this problem with the previous infrastructure. Maybe the email clients tend to not send the second email to the From address when there is Reply-To. For example, the std-discussion and std-proposals mailing lists use this scheme:
From: real original sender address To: mailing list address (e.g. "std-discussion@isocpp.org" <std-discussion@isocpp.org>) Reply-To: mailing list address (e.g. std-discussion@isocpp.org)
No Cc headers.
Can we use this scheme?
That was the previous scheme which caused the DMARC failure because DMARC won't allow this ML to send email From: an address it does not own.
Well, I'm not sure I understand the details, but I can see the problems with DMARC were resolved for isocpp.org lists at some point: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/boost-steering/EcKn2yA9ip4 And I can see that now the emails from those lists contain the original sender address in the From header. I'm not sure how exactly that was achieved, but I would like this list behave the same way.
Regarding your problems, I'm on Thunderbird and I'm finding no problem at all with the new ML config. Somebody obviously told Thunderbird about the new munging option for Mailman and it all "just works".
The real problem seems to me to be gmail having stupid handling.
As I understand, this is not a client problem per se, since it is supposed to add CC to a reply when the user hits Reply All. Just as the mail server is supposed to deliver the message to all recipients. It so happens that mail delivery between gmail accounts sometimes happens faster than the roundtrip between gmail and the ML server, which makes the email from the ML a duplicate and lost. You're not seeing the problem probably because there are no other participants from nedprod.com, so the problem is less likely to appear for you.
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Niall Douglas via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Still, I've never had this problem with the previous infrastructure. Maybe the email clients tend to not send the second email to the From address when there is Reply-To. For example, the std-discussion and std-proposals mailing lists use this scheme:
From: real original sender address To: mailing list address (e.g. "std-discussion@isocpp.org" <std-discussion@isocpp.org>) Reply-To: mailing list address (e.g. std-discussion@isocpp.org)
No Cc headers.
Can we use this scheme?
That was the previous scheme which caused the DMARC failure because DMARC won't allow this ML to send email From: an address it does not own.
Well, I'm not sure I understand the details, but I can see the problems with DMARC were resolved for isocpp.org lists at some point:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/boost-steering/EcKn2yA9ip4
And I can see that now the emails from those lists contain the original sender address in the From header. I'm not sure how exactly that was achieved, but I would like this list behave the same way.
Ping? I can see other people also having problems with the current setup. Is there someone specific I should ask for help with this matter? Any ticket/issue/request system?
On 3/26/2017 8:58 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Niall Douglas via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Still, I've never had this problem with the previous infrastructure. Maybe the email clients tend to not send the second email to the From address when there is Reply-To. For example, the std-discussion and std-proposals mailing lists use this scheme:
From: real original sender address To: mailing list address (e.g. "std-discussion@isocpp.org" <std-discussion@isocpp.org>) Reply-To: mailing list address (e.g. std-discussion@isocpp.org)
No Cc headers.
Can we use this scheme?
That was the previous scheme which caused the DMARC failure because DMARC won't allow this ML to send email From: an address it does not own.
Well, I'm not sure I understand the details, but I can see the problems with DMARC were resolved for isocpp.org lists at some point:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/boost-steering/EcKn2yA9ip4
And I can see that now the emails from those lists contain the original sender address in the From header. I'm not sure how exactly that was achieved, but I would like this list behave the same way.
Ping?
The mailing lists for std-discussion and std-proposals are not run by isocpp.org but by google groups. The ones affected by DMARC were the WG21 lists. Regards, -- Agustín K-ballo Bergé http://talesofcpp.fusionfenix.com
On 03/27/17 04:29, Agustín Bergé via Boost wrote:
On 3/26/2017 8:58 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Niall Douglas via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Still, I've never had this problem with the previous infrastructure. Maybe the email clients tend to not send the second email to the From address when there is Reply-To. For example, the std-discussion and std-proposals mailing lists use this scheme:
From: real original sender address To: mailing list address (e.g. "std-discussion@isocpp.org" <std-discussion@isocpp.org>) Reply-To: mailing list address (e.g. std-discussion@isocpp.org)
No Cc headers.
Can we use this scheme?
That was the previous scheme which caused the DMARC failure because DMARC won't allow this ML to send email From: an address it does not own.
Well, I'm not sure I understand the details, but I can see the problems with DMARC were resolved for isocpp.org lists at some point:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/boost-steering/EcKn2yA9ip4
And I can see that now the emails from those lists contain the original sender address in the From header. I'm not sure how exactly that was achieved, but I would like this list behave the same way.
Ping?
The mailing lists for std-discussion and std-proposals are not run by isocpp.org but by google groups. The ones affected by DMARC were the WG21 lists.
Oh, I thought Herb was referring to std-discussion and std-proposals. In any case, I'm assuming these list don't have the DMARC problem because the messages contain "Received-SPF: pass ..." header.
On 3/26/17 16:58, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Niall Douglas via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Still, I've never had this problem with the previous infrastructure. Maybe the email clients tend to not send the second email to the From address when there is Reply-To. For example, the std-discussion and std-proposals mailing lists use this scheme:
From: real original sender address To: mailing list address (e.g. "std-discussion@isocpp.org" <std-discussion@isocpp.org>) Reply-To: mailing list address (e.g. std-discussion@isocpp.org)
No Cc headers.
Can we use this scheme?
That was the previous scheme which caused the DMARC failure because DMARC won't allow this ML to send email From: an address it does not own.
Well, I'm not sure I understand the details, but I can see the problems with DMARC were resolved for isocpp.org lists at some point:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/boost-steering/EcKn2yA9ip4
And I can see that now the emails from those lists contain the original sender address in the From header. I'm not sure how exactly that was achieved, but I would like this list behave the same way.
Ping? I can see other people also having problems with the current setup. Is there someone specific I should ask for help with this matter? Any ticket/issue/request system?
Are you referring to receiving two messages (one from the CC and one from the ML) with gmail unable to figure out what to make of it as the problem? What other problems are people having? I see other people had issues with their mail client setup. -- Michael Caisse Ciere Consulting ciere.com
On 03/27/17 04:50, Michael Caisse via Boost wrote:
On 3/26/17 16:58, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Niall Douglas via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Still, I've never had this problem with the previous infrastructure. Maybe the email clients tend to not send the second email to the From address when there is Reply-To. For example, the std-discussion and std-proposals mailing lists use this scheme:
From: real original sender address To: mailing list address (e.g. "std-discussion@isocpp.org" <std-discussion@isocpp.org>) Reply-To: mailing list address (e.g. std-discussion@isocpp.org)
No Cc headers.
Can we use this scheme?
That was the previous scheme which caused the DMARC failure because DMARC won't allow this ML to send email From: an address it does not own.
Well, I'm not sure I understand the details, but I can see the problems with DMARC were resolved for isocpp.org lists at some point:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/boost-steering/EcKn2yA9ip4
And I can see that now the emails from those lists contain the original sender address in the From header. I'm not sure how exactly that was achieved, but I would like this list behave the same way.
Ping? I can see other people also having problems with the current setup. Is there someone specific I should ask for help with this matter? Any ticket/issue/request system?
Are you referring to receiving two messages (one from the CC and one from the ML) with gmail unable to figure out what to make of it as the problem?
Yes. At least, that's my understanding of the problem.
What other problems are people having? I see other people had issues with their mail client setup.
I mean, people other than me are having the problem with two emails. Ion's problem with the address book is also worth noting because I see nothing wrong with having the list address in the address book. If the real sender address was in the From header, this problem wouldn't have occurred.
AMDG On 03/27/2017 02:30 AM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
Ion's problem with the address book is also worth noting because I see nothing wrong with having the list address in the address book.
It isn't a problem as long as you uncheck "Always prefer display name over message header"
If the real sender address was in the From header, this problem wouldn't have occurred.
In Christ, Steven Watanabe
Boost - Dev mailing list wrote
What other problems are people having?
Nabble now shows every message's author as "Boost - Dev mailing list". I haven't found any way tofind out the real author in Nabble when there is no signature. -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/mailing-list-No-Reply-To-in-messages-tp46... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 3/27/17 02:05, Marcel Raad via Boost wrote:
Boost - Dev mailing list wrote
What other problems are people having?
Nabble now shows every message's author as "Boost - Dev mailing list". I haven't found any way tofind out the real author in Nabble when there is no signature.
That is super annoying. Let me see what other things we can do. -- Michael Caisse Ciere Consulting ciere.com
On 03/27/17 17:02, Michael Caisse via Boost wrote:
On 3/27/17 02:05, Marcel Raad via Boost wrote:
Boost - Dev mailing list wrote
What other problems are people having?
Nabble now shows every message's author as "Boost - Dev mailing list". I haven't found any way tofind out the real author in Nabble when there is no signature.
That is super annoying. Let me see what other things we can do.
Any news about this?
On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 03/27/17 17:02, Michael Caisse via Boost wrote:
On 3/27/17 02:05, Marcel Raad via Boost wrote:
Boost - Dev mailing list wrote
What other problems are people having?
Nabble now shows every message's author as "Boost - Dev mailing list". I haven't found any way tofind out the real author in Nabble when there is no signature.
That is super annoying. Let me see what other things we can do.
Any news about this?
"Reply-To: boost@lists.boost.org" is there but if I use Reply All you'll receive a direct message that'll (probably) not have the Reply-To header. -- Olaf
On 04/05/17 17:01, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 03/27/17 17:02, Michael Caisse via Boost wrote:
On 3/27/17 02:05, Marcel Raad via Boost wrote:
Boost - Dev mailing list wrote
What other problems are people having?
Nabble now shows every message's author as "Boost - Dev mailing list". I haven't found any way tofind out the real author in Nabble when there is no signature.
That is super annoying. Let me see what other things we can do.
Any news about this?
"Reply-To: boost@lists.boost.org" is there but if I use Reply All you'll receive a direct message that'll (probably) not have the Reply-To header.
Yes, that's what I'm seeing (including your message). I was interested if there was any progress in solving this problem.
On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Any news about this?
"Reply-To: boost@lists.boost.org" is there but if I use Reply All you'll receive a direct message that'll (probably) not have the Reply-To header.
Yes, that's what I'm seeing (including your message).
I was interested if there was any progress in solving this problem.
What possible solutions exist? Reply-To is there.. -- Olaf
On 04/05/17 21:16, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Any news about this?
"Reply-To: boost@lists.boost.org" is there but if I use Reply All you'll receive a direct message that'll (probably) not have the Reply-To header.
Yes, that's what I'm seeing (including your message).
I was interested if there was any progress in solving this problem.
What possible solutions exist? Reply-To is there..
The solution is to set From to the original sender and remove the CC. Use some other workaround to pass DMARC checks.
On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 8:23 PM, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev@gmail.com> wrote:
On 04/05/17 21:16, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Any news about this?
"Reply-To: boost@lists.boost.org" is there but if I use Reply All you'll receive a direct message that'll (probably) not have the Reply-To header.
Yes, that's what I'm seeing (including your message).
I was interested if there was any progress in solving this problem.
What possible solutions exist? Reply-To is there..
The solution is to set From to the original sender and remove the CC. Use
Then Reply All would still reply directly to the sender wouldn't it? -- Olaf
On 04/05/17 21:24, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 8:23 PM, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev@gmail.com> wrote:
On 04/05/17 21:16, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Any news about this?
"Reply-To: boost@lists.boost.org" is there but if I use Reply All you'll receive a direct message that'll (probably) not have the Reply-To header.
Yes, that's what I'm seeing (including your message).
I was interested if there was any progress in solving this problem.
What possible solutions exist? Reply-To is there..
The solution is to set From to the original sender and remove the CC. Use
Then Reply All would still reply directly to the sender wouldn't it?
It didn't previously. As I understand it, Reply all sends messages to Reply-To or From and all CCs. I'm not familiar with the involved RFCs though.
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 12:11 AM, Niall Douglas via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Still, I've never had this problem with the previous infrastructure. Maybe the email clients tend to not send the second email to the From address when there is Reply-To. For example, the std-discussion and std-proposals mailing lists use this scheme:
From: real original sender address To: mailing list address (e.g. "std-discussion@isocpp.org" <std-discussion@isocpp.org>) Reply-To: mailing list address (e.g. std-discussion@isocpp.org)
No Cc headers.
Can we use this scheme?
That was the previous scheme which caused the DMARC failure because DMARC won't allow this ML to send email From: an address it does not own.
Regarding your problems, I'm on Thunderbird and I'm finding no problem at all with the new ML config. Somebody obviously told Thunderbird about the new munging option for Mailman and it all "just works".
I'm not entirely sure but isn't there a difference between Sender and From? I thought you could still have the original From header somehow.
The real problem seems to me to be gmail having stupid handling.
How so? -- Olaf
On 22/03/2017 0:11, Niall Douglas via Boost wrote:
Regarding your problems, I'm on Thunderbird and I'm finding no problem at all with the new ML config. Somebody obviously told Thunderbird about the new munging option for Mailman and it all "just works".
The real problem seems to me to be gmail having stupid handling.
I'm also on Thunderbird (Windows), but using NTTP via Gname, and only Boost.build shows "Joe Coder via Boost list" in the From column. All other lists show only the boost mailing list address, which is really annoying and makes difficult to follow the discussion. I've reviewed the raw headers and the "Joe Coder via xxx" From field is there but for some reason I can't understand yet my thunderbird configuration does not like it and show only the mailing list address in the From column of the NTTP. Best, Ion
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 10:51 PM, Ion Gaztañaga via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 22/03/2017 0:11, Niall Douglas via Boost wrote:
Regarding your problems, I'm on Thunderbird and I'm finding no problem at all with the new ML config. Somebody obviously told Thunderbird about the new munging option for Mailman and it all "just works".
The real problem seems to me to be gmail having stupid handling.
I'm also on Thunderbird (Windows), but using NTTP via Gname, and only Boost.build shows "Joe Coder via Boost list" in the From column. All other lists show only the boost mailing list address, which is really annoying and makes difficult to follow the discussion.
I've reviewed the raw headers and the "Joe Coder via xxx" From field is there but for some reason I can't understand yet my thunderbird configuration does not like it and show only the mailing list address in the From column of the NTTP.
The email address is boost@lists.boost.org in all cases, is that address in your TB address book? Different names with the same email address might confuse TB. -- Olaf
On 24/03/2017 9:04, Olaf van der Spek via Boost wrote:
The email address is boost@lists.boost.org in all cases, is that address in your TB address book? Different names with the same email address might confuse TB.
Awesome. The list address was in the address book with boost at etc.. name. Deleting all boost entries from the "collected" addresses makes "Joe Coder via Boost" visible. That also explains why boost build list was not having problems (this address was not in the address book). Many thanks, Ion
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 9:53 PM, Edward Diener via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 3/21/2017 9:24 AM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
Hi,
Sometimes I can see messages from the mailing list that have no Reply-To header. For example, this is the headers from a recent email from the ML:
Maybe you should explain how you are interacting with the mailing list.
I'm using Thunderbird on Kubuntu 16.10 as an email client to read and reply to emails I receive from the mailing list.
participants (13)
-
Agustín Bergé -
Andrey Semashev -
Daniel James -
degski -
Edward Diener -
Ion Gaztañaga -
Marcel Raad -
Michael Caisse -
Niall Douglas -
Olaf van der Spek -
Paul A. Bristow -
Rene Rivera -
Steven Watanabe