Re: Reply-to:

[oly@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Oliver Oberdorf)]

:   >Reply-to: IS the right thing to do, IMO, since it will get
:   >people to reply to the correct address.
:
:   Unfortunately your opinion is wrong, since it won't get machines to
:   reply to the correct address.
[...]
:    * The `return path' is the envelope sender address.  This tends to
:      get used for bounce messages, and therefore must point somewhere
:      sensible.  (Consider the case of a message with no valid headers
:      at all; a bounce must still go somewhere sane.)
:
:    * The From: line in the header.  This needs to be set correctly so
:      that replies go to the right place.

Indeed?  I've had marvelous success with it for over a year
now.  The only reference I have on hand is, unfortunately,
the O'Rielly GNU Emacs manual, but they say this much...

p.102

"Mail messages can use a *Reply-to:* field to guarantee that
replies will be sent to the correct place."

and later on the same page...

"If you know that you will always receive mail that's been
sent to the addresss /george@futons.com/, you can do a lot
to solve your problem by putting the address in the
*Reply-to:* field of your outgoing mail"

I've also recieved bounced mail w/o difficulty, as I recall.
Of course, I'm using sendmail so that *could* cause some
differences.

Bottom line?  Richard's solution will work, with the one
problem we both recognize, so you can use it.  My advice is
free, so you can try that too and if it works, it works.

~Oly
oly@head-cfa.harvard.edu