On Fri, 2003-01-24 at 05:54, Shawn McMahon wrote: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 01:30:28AM -0800, Alexander Hvostov said: > > I don't see Mail-Followup-To in RFC 2822. Where is it specified? > > Doesn't need to be. It's text in my message explicitly asking > you NOT to carbon-copy me. Policy for this list requires you to > not carbon me unless I specifically ask you to, so I'm going > above and beyond the requirements of the rules by specifically > asking you not to. As you can see, I don't need Mail-Followup-To to do that. > > I've got a suggestion for you. Send Reply-To instead of > > Mail-Followup-To. That's specified in RFC 2822 and should be supported > > by all mailers. > > Reply-To is not the proper header for asking that list posts not > be carbon copied. It is the proper header for specifying that > private replies be directed to a different email address than the > "From" address. Strangely enough, I seem to remember that it was documented in RFC (2)822 as being suitable for that purpose, but I can't find it, so forget about that. We have something better anyway: List-Post, which I've explained in another email. Alex. -- PGP Public Key: http://aoi.dyndns.org/~alex/pgp-public-key -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS d- s:++ a18 C++(++++)>$ UL+++(++++) P--- L+++>++++ E---- W+(+++) N- o-- K+ w--- !O M(+) V-- PS+++ PE-- Y+ PGP+(+++) t* 5-- X-- R tv b- DI D+++ G e h! !r y ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part