[ris-int] FW: NCC#2004073298 Re: rrc01:PEERING 8210
Shane Kerr shane at ripe.net
Fri Jul 23 18:01:24 CEST 2004
Henk Uijterwaal (RIPE NCC) wrote: > On Fri, 23 Jul 2004, Arife Vural wrote: > > >>>>>>>From: RIPE NCC Acknowledgements [mailto:hm-ack at ripe.net] >>>>> >>>>>The mail should probably come from an address other than than >>>>>hm-ack at ripe.net >>>> >>>> >>>>As far as I know hm-ack at ripe.net goes to /dev/null and I did not >>>>see much point create another alias to /dev/null and used the >>>>available one. >>> >>>In that case, shouldn't the message come from "do not reply" and have a >> >>something like that I guess, do-not-reply at ripe.net. it sounds good to me. >> >> >>>Reply-to: field? >> >>Now, it looks we do not have Reply-to, I'm not sure it will make sense >>setting this one, since we do not want them reply for ACK. I will check >>with other guys and it would be useful or not. > > > No, but people tend to reply to the last mail they have in their files, > if you use something like hm-ack at r.n it looks as if a human will read > it. We have an address for this, called <unread at ripe.net>. Arife, can you change the autoresponder accordingly? TIA, -- Shane Kerr RIPE NCC
[ Ris-int Archives ]