On 2/24/2014 12:12 PM, Stan Hoeppner <s...@hardwarefreak.com> wrote:
On 2/24/2014 8:42 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2/24/2014 8:39 AM, Stan Hoeppner <s...@hardwarefreak.com> wrote:
On 2/24/2014 6:58 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2/24/2014 3:58 AM, Steffen Kaiser <skdove...@smail.inf.fh-brs.de>
wrote:
I would add a BCC recipient in the MTA. It's more save in such
situation. See the thread about qmail and multiple recipients for one
mail address.
The only downside to this is all of the original headers are *not*
preserved in the BCC copy.
Given this is a function of the MTA,
Says who? I would argue that it is more a function of the MDA.
Says both Steffen's remarks above, and your reply to them. Why you would take
exception to my simply reiterating the context is inexplicable.
My comment about how it would work if/when using bcc settings (missing
Steffen's reference to qmail, thus failing to limit my reference to
postfix's use of the bcc settings) does not equate to my agreeing with
the idea that 'it is the function of an MTA'.
It *can* be a function of an MTA, but it can also - and I would/have
argued that it is more appropriately - a function of the MDA (the
relevant part of that acronym being 'Delivery').
I took exception to the tone of your comment that I 'would ass-u-me that
everyone on the list uses my MTA of choice'.
are you stating with authority that all the dozen or so Unix MTAs
behave in this manner? Or are you simply stating the behavior of your
MTA, and assuming everyone on the list also uses your MTA?
Obviously the latter (postfix)... apologies for my presumptuousness.
It's not at all obvious, which is why I asked.
I think it is obvious, since the alternative (that I can speak with
authority with respect to 'the dozen or so Unix MTAs') is highly
unlikely, even impossible - which is also why I took exception to the
comment. It appeared, in my view, to be a comment aimed solely at
chastising me for making a simple mistake of context, and that, again, I
missed Steffen's reference to qmail (god, who uses that ancient,
unmaintained thing anymore).
When one makes a blanket statement such as that above, with 'not' in *bold*
print, the statement needs to be qualified. This is precisely why I asked the
two questions.
And I apologized for presuming to assume that everyone uses postfix...
--
Best regards,
Charles
