On Sat, 31 May 1997 04:53:38 -0500 (CDT), Ray Jones wrote:
>> "text message teleconferencing" groups equipped with automatic
>> distribution services: include the address of that service in the
>> "Reply-To" field of all messages submitted to the teleconference;
>> then participants can "reply" to conference submissions to
>> guarantee the correct distribution of any submission of their own.
>
>I don't see how else one could interpret it.
>
>Though I do use it in that manner, I'm not advocating it. I do it for my
>own reasons and so far have had no trouble though some have indicated I
>will or at least could have.
The REPLY-TO header field is to be inserted by the message originator
and not to be manipulated later. If you read further down in RFC 822
you'll find
4.4.3. REPLY-TO / RESENT-REPLY-TO
[...]
Note: [...] The "Reply-To" field is added by the message
originator and is intended to direct replies.
If you, on the other hand, let the original message be included
in a message from the list then you can can set any appropriate
REPLY-TO. But then you don't have message distribution to the
list, but a new message created by the list program. In that case
you should set FROM to the list.
Mats Dufberg
mats.dufberg@abc.se
|
|
