Email address VERP problems (was RE: Does a call to a language handler provide a context/session, and somewhere to keep session data?

David Bennett wrote:

owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Alvaro Herrera

On that subject. I noticed that Outlook seems to add the "return
path"
addresses (sometimes called bounce address or envelope sender) to the
CC header, which sets a new record in the stupidity scale. Since we
use VERP, each message gets a different return path address, so with
each reply you make, Outlook adds a new address to the CC.

Interesting. I use a lot of mailing lists and I've not run across one
actually using VERP before. Is it becoming more frequent?

Not sure if it's becoming more frequent -- I only manage *this* list
server and we enabled VERP several years ago. I thought it was common
practice ... the idea of manually managing addresses that bounce seems
completely outdated now.

I checked the headers. It seems this list is using a VERP address for both
the Return-path and the Reply-To, and only the Sender identifies the list
directly.

I'm pretty sure our list server is not setting the VERP address in
Reply-To. That would be insane, wouldn't it. We don't touch the
Reply-To header at all. Maybe some other program along the way modifies
the email before Outlook gets it?

I rather think the problem is that the list software is not pruning VERP
addresses from the emails it sends out. I don't know exactly what is causing
them, but it certainly seems to me something that the list software could
handle effortlessly.

Well, since the VERP addresses are not supposed to appear in those
headers, the list software doesn't try to prune -- that would be useless
99.95% of the time. You see, this is the first time that I have seen
any mail chain do this (I've been here for several years.)

Sorry, but there is nothing to tweak. It all seems to be working just fine
at this end. But I will keep any eye out for extra VERPs and delete them (as
I have on this message).

Thanks. I think it will be better for your continued mental health to
ensure that nothing adds such addresses to Reply-To, if that is indeed
what is happening.

--
�lvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
wrote:

David Bennett wrote:

owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Alvaro Herrera

On that subject. I noticed that Outlook seems to add the "return
path"
addresses (sometimes called bounce address or envelope sender) to the
CC header, which sets a new record in the stupidity scale. Since we
use VERP, each message gets a different return path address, so with
each reply you make, Outlook adds a new address to the CC.

Interesting. I use a lot of mailing lists and I've not run across one
actually using VERP before. Is it becoming more frequent?

Not sure if it's becoming more frequent -- I only manage *this* list
server and we enabled VERP several years ago. I thought it was common
practice ... the idea of manually managing addresses that bounce seems
completely outdated now.

It's been frequent for quite some time.

I checked the headers. It seems this list is using a VERP address for

both

the Return-path and the Reply-To, and only the Sender identifies the list
directly.

I'm pretty sure our list server is not setting the VERP address in
Reply-To. That would be insane, wouldn't it. We don't touch the
Reply-To header at all. Maybe some other program along the way modifies
the email before Outlook gets it?

Yeah, same here.

However, if you look at the thread, it seems the VERP address was added to
the *original email*. In the To field. Perhaps that's what confused the MUA
into adding *another* VERP address on the reply?

Then AFAICT in
/messages/by-id/raw/001601d17852$7bea9e80$73bfdb80$@pfxcorp.com
a second VERP address was added to the mail (very the 485 one).

To me it look slike this was definitely done by the MTA or MUA at
pfxcorp.com. The archived copy (which is delivered the exact same way as a
general email, it doesn't have any shortcut) does not contain this address
naywhere, it was only used as an envelope sender. Possibly it got confused
by the other VERP address in the initial email, which AFAICT is a manual
mistake.

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Magnus Hagander
Sent: Thursday, 10 March 2016 6:18 AM
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: David Bennett <davidb@pfxcorp.com>; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Email address VERP problems (was RE: [GENERAL] Does a call to a language handler provide a context/session, and somewhere to keep session data?

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com <mailto:alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> > wrote:

David Bennett wrote:

owner@postgresql.org <mailto:owner@postgresql.org> ] On Behalf Of Alvaro Herrera

On that subject. I noticed that Outlook seems to add the "return
path"
addresses (sometimes called bounce address or envelope sender) to the
CC header, which sets a new record in the stupidity scale. Since we
use VERP, each message gets a different return path address, so with
each reply you make, Outlook adds a new address to the CC.

Interesting. I use a lot of mailing lists and I've not run across one
actually using VERP before. Is it becoming more frequent?

Not sure if it's becoming more frequent -- I only manage *this* list
server and we enabled VERP several years ago. I thought it was common
practice ... the idea of manually managing addresses that bounce seems
completely outdated now.

It's been frequent for quite some time.

I checked the headers. It seems this list is using a VERP address for both
the Return-path and the Reply-To, and only the Sender identifies the list
directly.

I'm pretty sure our list server is not setting the VERP address in
Reply-To. That would be insane, wouldn't it. We don't touch the
Reply-To header at all. Maybe some other program along the way modifies
the email before Outlook gets it?

Yeah, same here.

However, if you look at the thread, it seems the VERP address was added to the *original email*. In the To field. Perhaps that's what confused the MUA into adding *another* VERP address on the reply?

That happens when I hit reply to.

Then AFAICT in /messages/by-id/raw/001601d17852$7bea9e80$73bfdb80$@pfxcorp.com a second VERP address was added to the mail (very the 485 one).

To me it look slike this was definitely done by the MTA or MUA at pfxcorp.com <http://pfxcorp.com&gt; . The archived copy (which is delivered the exact same way as a general email, it doesn't have any shortcut) does not contain this address naywhere, it was only used as an envelope sender. Possibly it got confused by the other VERP address in the initial email, which AFAICT is a manual mistake.

That’s possible. We have a non-standard mail server (as you can see from the headers). I’ll check.

Regards

David M Bennett FACS

_____

Andl - A New Database Language - andl.org