On Mar 10, 2011, at 7:48 PM, LuKreme wrote: > http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.html >> When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it indicates the mailbox(es) to which >> the author of the message suggests that replies be sent. >> >> Your list software is not "the author of the message", so it must not set or >> in any way meddle with the Reply-To header field. That field exists for the >> author and the author alone. If your list munges it, you are violating the >> standard. > > This is interpretation is not cut and dried, by any means, and RFC2822 has > very little to say about mailing lists in general.
I think it is very clear in RFC 2822 3.6.2 which says: When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it indicates the mailbox(es) to which the author of the message suggests that replies be sent. *the author* is he who wrote the email, not the listserve forwarding this email. However, a list serve signup agreement and its preferences could enable the author to express this suggestion as an option. That option would allow them to set their post's Reply-To: to either that of the list serve email address, or their own. But it's very clear in the language that it's the author who determines the suggested email address for replies. This actually would resolve a number of ambiguities that only the author himself is in a position to resolve. Some list members want their replies to go to list and their email, in which case they would set Reply-To to their email address, causing most people to use Reply All and thereby both list and individual email addresses would be used. Other list members want replies to go only to the list, in which case Reply-To: would be the list, and most people would respond using Reply instead of Reply all. Chris Murphy_______________________________________________ MacOSX-admin mailing list [email protected] http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-admin
