So if setting the Reply-To in the config file breaks RFCs what is the proper
way to have people reply to the list?
At 03:47 PM 6/27/96 -0400, you wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>>>>>> "SG" == Stephen Graham <graham@ee.washington.edu> writes:
>
>SG> RFC 822 requires Return-Path to be set to the originator. Reply-To
>SG> can be set to anything. Here's the relevant portion of the RFC:
>
>Not quite. Reply-To must point to a valid Internet mailbox, and it is
>set by the originator of a message. Check the definition of the header
>and compare it with the definition of the Sender header.
>
>[...]
>
>> The "Reply-To" field is added by the message
>> originator and is intended to direct replies.
>
>SG> Setting Reply-To to the list name is an example of the third case above.
>
>The message *originator*, the author, setting Reply-To is an example of
>the third case. The message *sender*, Majordomo, setting Reply-To is a
>violation of all three cases because it is not the originator.
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: 2.6.3
>Charset: noconv
>
>iQCVAwUBMdLlN56VRH7BJMxHAQHyQAP+OZWDmm2pvDmaGmNN/tShmouwcy0BVo8v
>aHG3WZIG8LVH1uIMm6R1ioY76iHbxNP0NswXsnqIY1tPTFwOoSshWhM3jsqgzyAN
>z/Xvux4snDRDOysCbs3JzjXHd40vw2Jc7nKFUuIigK376lJRBllm4/zQBd3L1eLP
>gbW6rqKpYEQ=
>=Dn0e
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>--
>Richard Pieri/Information Services \ When in doubt, cop an attitude. -A cat's
><ratinox@unilab.dfci.harvard.edu> \ guide to life
>http://www.dfci.harvard.edu/ \
>
>
Steve Easley
Assistant Vice President
The Netside
803/732-7757
steve@netside.com
The Netside is a CCSI, Inc. company.
Follow-Ups:
-
Re: Reply-To
From: Richard Pieri <ratinox@unilab.dfci.harvard.edu>
|
|
