Re: Rationale for non-standard VERP in MJ2?

"Marian Ďurkovič" <[email protected]> writes:
> I can't find any RFC about VERP, meaning it never went through proper IETF
> process.

That's because it is not something that would be appropriate for
standardization, any more than it would be appropriate to standardize
how MTAs handle their internal log files.

VERP needs no standardization. It is an agreement by an MTA with
itself about how it processes return addresses.

> As such, it's nothing else than a hack - or a way how to (ab)use
> envelope sender for purposes it was never meant for. This is why
> other listservers typically use VERP with extreme care - e.g. only
> once per month for subscription reminders, but not for regular email
> on the list.

Huh?

I know of a number of list managers that use VERP for every outgoing
message, and it works just fine if you use it well. I run several big
lists and use VERP in conjunction with postfix and a little wrapper
program I wrote -- saves me vast amounts of time.

There is nothing dangerous or problematic about VERP, and there is no
reason to "use it with extreme care"...

Perry