On Oct 02 at 21:08, Will Yardley spoke: [snipping a lot]
> Most mail clients either blindly honor Reply-To: OR give the user an > option (or allow you to configure it either way). > > > And maybe there are also mailers which expect another header rather > > than Reply-To. So if I knew those I could try to be compatible with > > them. > > Reply-To is the only one that's an internet standard AFAIK, and the only > one that's widely implemented (for email, that is - Usenet has > 'Followup-To', which is what Mail-Followup-To is based on). > > You should be reasonably safe setting 'Reply-To'. The majority of ansers I get in deed come from mail clients that do honor Reply-To. But occasionally I realize that I get answers at the address that's not mentioned in the Reply-To header. Now if the only reason Reply-To is not honored is the configuration of the one's MUA that's answering me, I have to accept that. But if there is _another reason_ for this and I can do something about it, I'd just like to know... -Hanspeter
