Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!purdue!ames!amdahl!pacbell!pbhyf!rob
From: rob@PacBell.COM (Rob Bernardo)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.elm
Subject: Re: "Reply-to:" fields
Message-ID: <5874@pbhyf.PacBell.COM>
Date: 2 Aug 89 16:51:18 GMT
References: <769@lilink.UUCP> <3816@orca.WV.TEK.COM> <1514@laura.UUCP>
Reply-To: rob@PacBell.COM (Rob Bernardo)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Lines: 18

In article <1514@laura.UUCP> richard@unidocv.UUCP (Richard Czech) writes:
+Yes, thats the solution I've found, too. But: Does ELM use the "Reply-to:"
+if I want to reply to a mail. I am using ELM 2.2 PL0 and tested it. The 
+result is that my replies were always sent to the adress given in the 
+"From:"-entry and not the adress given in the "Reply-to:" header.

(The header should be "Reply-To:". Note the upper case "T".)

Yes, ELM does use the "Reply-To:". When ELM is configured, there is
a choice between relying on the "From:" and "Reply-To:" headers to
get the return address of a message, or else on the "From " lines.
If configured to use the former, ELM will use the "Reply-To:" if
present, else the "From:".
-- 
Rob Bernardo      ...![backbone]!pacbell!pbhyf!rob -or- rob@pbhyf.PacBell.COM
  Product engineer, UNIX/C Reusable Code Library        Editor, "Go `C' UNIX"
  Office: (415) 823-2417                Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, California
  Residence: (415) 827-4301                     R BAR JB, Concord, California