On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 05:04:14PM +0900, John Crawley wrote: [...] > I may be wrong here but my understanding of "bounce" is that the software responsible for delivering a message (what I referred to as the "server") decides not to deliver it, and sends it back to the original address. So not something that an MUA can (or should be able to) do. Ah, now we are talking. Yes, sending back to the original address was the original use of "bounce". These days you (almost) *never* do that, because that address can be forged and has been used extensively by spammers (since sometime in the 1990ies!) to generate backscatter. > Wouldn't an attempt to "bounce" or possibly "resend" a message from an MUA need to be first accepted by the SMTP "server"? (What is the correct name for that?) Yes, any mail sent from your MUA has to be accepted by the next hop (typically a mail transfer agent, aka MTA). Some have policies in place (e.g. the "From:" header is restricted). This might thwart a bounce. > Is a message with Resent-* fields treated as being from the user or from the original sender? I don't know. It's most probably in the RFC. > BTW why does your message here have my email address as To:, and CC: to the list, even though I had no Reply-to: header in the message you are replying to? Because I replied using "group reply", and your message had "From" from you (some lists replace that in the header, the Debian ones don't). This is a discussion topic which comes up regularly (some folks *hate* getting list replies addressed at them). But there is no nice solution for all, alas. Cheers -- t
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature