Paul is saying that the REPLY-TO: coming from the list server is causing the problem. It's not an additional problem.
I think we are on an outdated list server. Most heavily used servers now replace the REPLY-TO: if specified in the incoming Email header. This list will only add the REPLY-TO: (not replace). If a REPLY-TO exists, then it does nothing which from my perspective is a bug. REPLY-TO must always be this list server. AT&T now inserts a REPLY-TO: regardless whether it is needed. Since they felt they would occasionally need it, this method creates a consistent environment for their Emails that they can easily document. Jon Perryman ________________________________ From: Russell West <[email protected]> ________________________________ > From: Paul Gilmartin > > BTW, did you supply the "Reply-To: Russell West ..." header, or > did AT&T bestow that also on you? > -- gil It seems that AT&T added that as well. Just one more change for the worse to heap on the already large stack. I have been complaining to AT&T for two weeks already, but things only seem to get worse. It seems AT&T believes in the practice of doing minimal testing and then using their customers as guinea pigs to find the bugs competent testing would have already revealed. It looks like I'll have to find another ISP and start migrating my multiple email account names. Then I will be able to completely sever my AT&T business. /russ
