On Sat, Aug 18, 2001 at 10:07:09PM +1000, Anand Kumria wrote: > On Fri, Aug 17, 2001 at 07:03:09PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 18, 2001 at 12:18:20AM +0200, Christian Marillat wrote: > > > >>>> "AB" == Adrian Bunk <email@example.com> writes: > > > > Since my MUA doesn't respect Mail-Copies-To:, too, could you please point > > > > me to the RFC where this header is defined so that I can blame the people > > > > who wrote my MUA? > > > > > > Mail-Copies-To isn't yet in RFC like signature separator "-- ". See : > > > > > > http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html > > > > I think he was trying to tell me that since it isn't in an RFC (yet), I > > should fuck off with my requests to not be spammed. > > No, he is trying to point out that every mail client supports Reply-To > already. > > If you set Reply-To, like I have, to the destination where you'd like > mail to be sent you have a greater chance of people respecting your > preference. [ from your headers ] Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org nnorman@canaris:~ $ host lists.debina.org lists.debina.org does not exist (Authoritative answer) nnorman@canaris:~ $ mx lists.debina.org lists.debina.org does not exist (Authoritative answer) That's interesting. > Even though you set Mail-Followup-To and Mail-Copies-To my MUA is > configured to ignore them (broken fields that they are). It does > follow Reply-To though. Sounds like your mailer is broken. > Plus, only *you* have to set Reply-To whereas with your approach people > have to remember what you do or don't like. Setting Reply-To will be > simpler and reduce your frustration level. One small problem ... MUAs which support M-F-T and have a list-reply function will follow up to the list no matter what you've set your Reply-To: to. If you think mutt and gnus (and several other MUAs) are "broken,. well, Good For You . -- Nathan Norman - Staff Engineer | A good plan today is better Micromuse Ltd. | than a perfect plan tomorrow. mailto:email@example.com | -- Patton  aka "GFY".
Description: PGP signature