Subject: Re: [boost] [mailing list] No Reply-To in messages?
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-03-27 08:30:01
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_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Niall Douglas via Boost
>>> <boost_at_[hidden]> 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_at_[hidden]"
>>>>> Reply-To: mailing list address (e.g. std-discussion_at_[hidden])
>>>>> 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:
>>> 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
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