On Monday, July 16, 2012 04:40:58, Nigel Metheringham wrote: > Chris Knadle wrote: > > On Sunday, July 15, 2012 07:14:34, Michael J. Tubby B.Sc G8TIC wrote: > >> Kevin, > >> > >> Rather than re-write the Reply-To: header why not just strip it off? The > >> Reply-To header is used in preference to the From: for the return > >> address, if it exists - but there's no requirement for it - AFAIK. > > > > It may not be a requirement, but stripping the Reply-To: header is likely > > make it more difficult for users to deal with mailing lists, because I > > think a Reply will default to being sent to the author rather than the > > mailing list.
I just realized what I wrote above most likely isn't relevant, because the only time this would be an issue is if an internal mail server was /running/ a mailing list. Outgoing mail going /to/ a mailing list usually has a Reply-To: of the sender. > I personally would still strip any Reply-To: with an internal domain in > it - fixing it is hard work and liable to unexpected results, stripping > it is easy. If people want Reply-To: then they should use valid > addresses in them. I think I agree with this now. -- Chris -- Chris Knadle [email protected] -- ## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
