Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ptsfa!ames!oliveb!epimass!jbuck From: jbuck@epimass.UUCP Newsgroups: news.software.b,news.misc Subject: rn Reply-To header considered harmful Message-ID: <1234@epimass.EPI.COM> Date: Thu, 4-Jun-87 17:19:02 EDT Article-I.D.: epimass.1234 Posted: Thu Jun 4 17:19:02 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 6-Jun-87 10:44:04 EDT Organization: Entropic Processing, Inc., Cupertino, CA Lines: 31 Keywords: not everyone is in the UUCP domain Xref: utgpu news.software.b:623 news.misc:446 rn assumes that everyone is in the UUCP domain, and generates Reply-To headers accordingly. In many cases, the result is not disasterous (if the site is on the UUCP map, say), but sometimes it is. For example, check this article out (irrelevant stuff zapped): From: mischief@panda.STANFORD.EDU (Trudy Leonhard) Newsgroups: soc.singles Subject: Re: Feeling old... Message-ID: <1715@panda.STANFORD.EDU> Date: 3 Jun 87 03:56:56 GMT Reply-To: mischief@panda.UUCP (Trudy Leonhard) Organization: Stanford University hello, networld? AM I GETTING THROUGH ANYMORE???!!!!???? Have they cut me off? Hell, I knew it was rough to get out of NJ - but is the price no more net.postings? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The person in question is probably feeling lonely because mail replies to her postings are going to a completely different machine: namely the panda on the UUCP map, in Concord, Mass. The solution is trivial. rn shouldn't generate a Reply-To header at all! People can always add one if the reply should go to someone else besides the poster. Meanwhile anyone on a domainized machine should delete or change the reply-to header. -- - Joe Buck jbuck@epimass.EPI.COM (in the brave new world of domains!) {seismo,ucbvax,sun,decwrl,}!epimass.epi.com!jbuck