Ahem Ahem....
Actually, I did not ask for the "Reply-To:" field. I asked that people doing
the actual reply not reply to both me and the list.
This is a technicality. I was not aware of the very good reasons mentioned
in Gilad's mail, and so I did have a change of heart on that matter.
Nadav - sorry, but so far you are the only voice in favour of the "reply-to"
field.
Nothing personal.
Shachar
----- Original Message -----
From: "Aviram Jenik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 6:20 PM
Subject: Re: firewall
> >
> > Due to all that hassle, and the extremly "under cover" approach that
both
> > Yosi and Eli have taken about the misdirected email, I vote the
> > "reply-to:" field be removed from the headers.
> >
> I second that. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Shachar was
the
> only one that asked for the reply-to feature. If my memory serves me right
> (and it rarely does), there's no reason not to remove this problematic
> header now that Shachar is voting for the other side...
>
> - Aviram
>
>
> =================================================================
> To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
> echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
