Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

Mark Rivers via Tech-talk <[email protected]> · Fri, 30 Nov 2018 12:35:01 +0000

Hi,


This is what I see with IOS 12.1. It is not working, I don't see Reply All, only Reply.


I don't know much about mail, but could the difference be that my Mail App is using a Microsoft Exchange Server?

Mark


________________________________
From: Hinko Kocevar <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2018 1:25 AM
To: Mark Rivers
Cc: Ivashkevych, Oksana; J. Lewis Muir; [email protected]
Subject: Re: Question about this mailing list

Hi,
No issues here.. IOS 12.0, Mail app. I get to see Reply all option when trying to reply.

[image1.png]

//hinko

Sent from my iPhone

On 30 Nov 2018, at 01:12, Mark Rivers via Tech-talk <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Hi Oksana,

What mail app are you running on the iPhone?  Both Lewis and I found that the iOS Mail App did not work.  You message sounds like you have Outlook for iOS?

Andrew found yesterday that office 365 mail did not work.

Mark


From: Ivashkevych, Oksana <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2018 4:54 PM
To: Mark Rivers <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 'J. Lewis Muir' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Question about this mailing list

Hi Mark and Lewis,
I have an iPhone, use office 365 outlook version 2.93.0 and do have both options. I have sent a test email from my phone before to the tech talk using reply all option and received one from tech talk as well. I also checked on aps tech talk page that the mail I received wasn’t a glitch.
As I thought further the only difference is I didn’t upgrade my OS. I still have 11.4.1.

I can easily share the screen shot because I am getting a new phone and most likely the problem discussed.

Oksana

[Image]


Oksana

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
________________________________
From: 30571046120n behalf of
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2018 17:28
To: 'J. Lewis Muir'
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Question about this mailing list

Hi Lewis,

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I also found that Reply All is not even an option for tech-talk messages received on an iPhone.

Mark


-----Original Message-----
From: J. Lewis Muir <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2018 3:26 PM
To: Mark Rivers <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Question about this mailing list

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:21 AM Mark Rivers <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> Here are the complete headers of that message as retrieved from Outlook:

[snip]

> Note that I was mistaken, there is a To: field, it is just higher up in the header and I missed it.
> Note also that in this message To: and From: are not the same, unlike what Ralph said.
>
> To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> From: =?gb2312?B?y+/M7NCl?= via Tech-talk <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Reply-To: =?gb2312?B?y+/M7NCl?= <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Sender: <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

Your copy of the email and mine are essentially identical after I remove Received headers and such:

===

--- muir-header-filtered.txt 2018-11-29 11:58:51.000000000 -0600
+++ rivers-header-filtered.txt 2018-11-29 12:03:59.000000000 -0600
@@ -25,6 +25,10 @@
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=subscribe>
From: =?gb2312?B?y+/M7NCl?= via Tech-talk <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: =?gb2312?B?y+/M7NCl?= <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
-Sender: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
+Sender: <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Errors-To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
-Return-Path: <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
+Return-Path: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
+X-MS-Exchange-Organization-Network-Message-Id:
fef35cc2-4dfc-4e60-74fe-08d655de68f9
+X-MS-Exchange-Organization-AuthSource: carsmail.CARS.APS.ANL.GOV<http://carsmail.CARS.APS.ANL.GOV>
+X-MS-Exchange-Organization-AuthAs: Anonymous
+X-MS-Exchange-Transport-EndToEndLatency: 00:00:00.2031686
===

So, in mine, I don't have the angle brackets around the Sender and Return-Path addresses; that doesn't matter. And I don't have the
X-MS-Exchange-* fields; that doesn't matter either.

This tells me the difference is in the MUA. Using Gmail, if I click the "Reply to all" button for that email, it creates a reply with the following header fields:

To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

For you with Outlook, it doesn't do that.

And I just tried with iOS 12.1 Mail, and it doesn't do that either: I tap the Reply button and the only reply choice is "Reply"; there is no "Reply All", so it's a pain to reply-all from iOS Mail.

As you alluded to, I think this change in behavior may be due to Argonne's email changes, DMARC in particular. Andrew, or whoever the list administrator is, would probably know. Specifically, it seems that Mailman, the mailing list manager software for the Tech-Talk list, is rewriting the header as follows.

The field

From: [name] [email-address]

becomes two fields

From: [name] via Tech-Talk <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: [name] [email-address]

I think this rewrite is causing the reply-all function of some MUAs (e.g., Outlook and iOS Mail) to not work correctly.

It would be helpful to know exactly how Outlook and iOS Mail determine the recipients for a reply-all. Maybe someone has documented it somewhere; I don't know.

Maybe Outlook and iOS Mail honor a Mail-Followup-To or Mail-Reply-To field, and the problem could be solved by making the mailing list manager software add one or both of those fields to the header of any Tech-Talk email it sends; I have no idea.

Or maybe there's a mailing list manager software option that could be tweaked. Based on the X-Mailman-Version header field, the Tech-Talk list is being managed by Mailman 2.1.12. That is the stable 2.x series version, but there is a stable 3.x series version too: Mailman 3.2.0. In 3.2.0, I see an interesting option "reply_goes_to_list" at

https://mailman.readthedocs.io/en/latest/src/mailman/handlers/docs/dmarc-mitigations.html

that says

reply_goes_to_list

If this is set to other than no-munging of Reply-To:, the original
From: goes in Cc: rather than Reply-To:. This is intended to make
MUA functions of reply and reply-all have the same effect with
messages to which mitigations have been applied as they do with
other messages.

I wonder if using this option would make the rewrite of

From: [name] [email-address]

become

From: [name] via Tech-Talk <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: [name] [email-address]

and if that would make the reply-all function of Outlook and iOS Mail work again.

Yet another approach is to, if you're willing and able to insert a header rewriting program into your local mail delivery pipeline, rewrite the header back to how it was before the DMARC changes. That is, for any Tech-Talk mailing list message, rewrite

From: [name] via Tech-Talk <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: [name] [email-address], [original-reply-to]

back to

From: [name] [email-address]
Reply-To: [original-reply-to]

But if there was a Reply-To field in the original, then I don't know exactly how the first rewrite works; hopefully it adds to the Reply-To field address list and doesn't just overwrite it. If it overwrites it, then there's no way to recover the original. If it prepends or appends, then you can just undo whatever it does to rewrite back to the original.

Lewis


Experimental Physics and Industrial Control System

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System