Murray S. Kucherawy writes:
So your perspective is "why bother [distinguishing List-Agent from User-Agent]", basically?
If you put it that way, yes. There sure does need to be a reason to bother.
That's fair, I guess, but at the same time, what's the harm in making the distinction?
Maybe there is no distinction to be made, in which case making an artificial distinction is creating confusion where there was none before.
Eg, I can just see someone arguing that when Mailman generates a message (a rejection, a password reminder, whatever) it's a User-Agent, while when it simply relays it's a List-Agent.
If for some reason something down the road wants to indicate the two separately, this would make it easy.
Let that "something" write the RFC, then, when it's got a reason for increasing congestion of the namespace.