Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!midway!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!mp.cs.niu.edu!rickert From: rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc Subject: Re: Smail 3.1 Mailing Lists -- Reply-To???? Message-ID: <1991Feb8.194340.32390@mp.cs.niu.edu> Date: 8 Feb 91 19:43:40 GMT References: <1991Feb07.154817.1580@chinet.chi.il.us> <121644@uunet.UU.NET> <20452337@bfmny0.BFM.COM> Organization: Northern Illinois University Lines: 34 In article <20452337@bfmny0.BFM.COM> tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff) writes: >I advocate sending them out this way: > > From: originalguy@his.site (Original Posting User) > To: listname@my.site (The Mailing List) > Subject: Whatever > Reply-To: listname@my.site > Errors-To: listname-request@my.site > Sender: listname-request@my.site > > original message text... Most of what you described makes lots of sense. But not the 'Reply-To: ' header. Most reasonable MUAs will not generate a reply to the 'From: ' header if there is a 'Reply-To: ' present. This means hand typing the address, probably juggling multiple windows to look it up. In short, it is an invitation to mistyping and incorrect addresses. If you really must put the listname on 'Reply-To:' (and I obviously wish you wouldn't), can you also put the originator's address there. Unlike the 'From: ' header, the 'Reply-To: ' can have multiple addresses. With Reply-To: listname@my.site, originalguy@his.site (Original Posting User) then the MUA will generate both addresses, and someone who wishes to only respond to the originator can edit the headers as needed. -- =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*= Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science Northern Illinois Univ. DeKalb, IL 60115 +1-815-753-6940