-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>> "RJ" == Ray Jones <rayjones@praline.no.neosoft.com> writes:
RJ> That was exactly my point. The original poster (seemed to me anyway) to
RJ> be using the statement that "reply-to" COULD be of use to (I forget how
RJ> it was worded, but I know it meant) mailing lists to argue that RFC822
RJ> forbade their use. I may have missed something (I often do - grin), but
RJ> it seemed to me to be just the opposite.
I stand by the interpretation that the intent of RFC822 in this regard is
that the Reply-To pointing to the [mailing list] is set by the author of a
message to that system. The definition of the header states that it is an
originator header, which means that regardless of how it is used it is only
set by the originator of a message. Mailing list managers are *NOT* the
originators of their lists' traffic, therefore mailing list managers should
not modify originator headers of that traffic.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 4.0 Business Edition
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBM5GT+p6VRH7BJMxHAQEY3wP/eAGMFzhFgcPBKyzqGjmaLEtlsvSAqPjp
0m+5Nt7pVLruNAoFUCOGd2/JcOb9uVqwCpZSMJ4/RJvZL8dAsAfo4k24hi6G+N+5
kka0aoYkJB1xLbDl4vbCQZjXJl2c5mwRy5lWQOpZQvPKKvpCVsIqbFdzTi9POdaL
jiT3/m7umq4=
=0u44
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Rich Pieri <rich.pieri@prescienttech.com> | When not in use, Happy Fun Ball
Prescient Technologies, Inc. | should be returned to its special
A Stone & Webster Company | container and kept under
I speak for myself, not PTI or SWEC | refrigeration.
Follow-Ups:
|
|
