Re: Mailing list headers [Was Re: ssh vs telnet - which is faster?]
Kenneth Stephen wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Dec 1999, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Friday, December 10, 1999, 4:04:47 AM, RAVIKANT wrote:
> > > * DO NOT BOTHER CC-ING THE MAIL REPLY , BECAUSE I AM ALREADY SUBSCRIBED TO
> > > ALL THE LISTS - ILUGC , LINUX-INDIA , LINUX-NEWBIE , DEBIAN-USER *
> > Might I suggest having them set reply-tos like all proper lists so people
> > don't have to munge headers to get to the right list or get bounces from lists
> > they are not subscribed to?
> I think that this is a bad suggestion since there are some people
> (such as me) who use the Reply-To headers to ensure that the recipients
> have a valid reply address to reply to us. If the mailing list rewrites
> the Reply-To by putting itself in that header, then the valid reply
> address is lost.
Exactly. See also http://garcon.unicom.com/FAQ/reply-to-harmful.html
> Furthermore, I think that the original problem of getting two
> copies of the same mail can be solved easily by using procmail.
They're still transmitted twice.
If you want to get the receipient to reply only to the list or to
you personally, use the Mail-Followup-To: header. Set it to the
list so modern mail programs will use that address if you hit group
Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.
Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.