Quoting John Martin:
> >X-Listserver: Your list server.
>I also agreed to contact this list to try to achieve a consenus for
>identifying mail which has come from a mailing list. David will try
>to make provision for this in future versions of Pegasus if we can
>(Dictator hat on)
>I think it would be nice if we all agreed on the format of a header to
>be added by our various list servers - would this be acceptable to the
>group? I prefer the 'X-Listserver:' form but I'm open to suggestions.
Quoting: Stephen R. van den Berg
> I already use a different field. It was suggested previously (about
> four months ago).
> To every outgoing mail I add:
> X-Mailing-List: <procmail @
> Precedence: list
> The format for the X-Mailing-List field would be:
> <submission_address_for_the_list> archive_retrieval_key
> The "Predence: list" field should be added by all mailinglist generated
> mail. It solves problems with the configuration of old sendmails
> (which don't send bounces on "Precedence: bulk"). And it is supported
> by Sendmail-6.XX and BSD4.4-vacation.
1) I haven't seen any definition of the purpose of the field we
are trying to agree upon. If it is to identify that "This
is a message sent out to this mailing list", then
(X-)Mailing-List is natural. If the purpose is to identify
which mailing list software was used to distribute the
message, then X-Listmanager is natural.
2) I think an "archive_retrieval_key" is too much, a
"sequence_number" is enough. Amongst others, the key can
become out of date. (In the above example: For how long is
this list regarded as "latest"?) Then it's more important to
use the space to inform the user about the name of the
I suggested in nov -92 (and still do):
7) Add a field on this form:
X-Mailing-List: [list name/description]*[sequence number] <[list address]>
X-Mailing-List: Mailing list admin*207 <List-Managers @
This is something we would like to promote. It is useful for (at
least) three purposes:
a) It identifies the message as a mailing list ditto and makes it
easy for an incoming-mail-sorter.
b) It serves as a loop detector - any incoming message containing
this field with the correct list address can be dumped.
c) The sequence number faciliates for a subscriber to find out if
he missed some message on the list. Also, it is easier for
anyone to refer to a number than to a long message-id.
3) If we can come to an agreement on this field, maybe we should
try to officially register it, as stated in RFC 822? I have
been told that nobody have done this before so it's about time...
(If we succeed we could skip the "X-" prefix!)
Peter Svanberg, NADA, KTH Email: psv @
Dept of Num An & CS,
Royal Inst of Tech Phone: +46 8 790 71 40
S-100 44 Stockholm, SWEDEN Fax: +46 8 790 09 30