Re: Understanding response protocols

On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Charles Lindsey wrote:

> Well, as MFT is currently implemented, either it gets filled in by 
> the mailing list administrator (according to whatever the "list 
> policy" is), or by the original poster - something like
>
>    Mail-Followup-To: [email protected],[email protected]
>
> For a man who wants personal as well as list replies. But to 
> provide that funtionality conveniently requires the poster's MUA to 
> be configured with a list of known mailing lists, and how the MFT 
> is to be formed for each.
>
> It would be better if there were a couple of keywords so you could say
>
>    Mail-Followup-To: poster,list
>
> and configure that for all lists you subscribe to.

To be honest, I'd rather see some kind of 'best-practice for 
Reply-To' document than MFT. Reply-To, in an ideal world, should work 
just as well. The only reason for MFT, it seems, is just to avoid 
bogus behaviour in MTAs wrt Reply-To.

I dont seem to having much success in my last mail asking whether 
it'd be an idea to draft such a BCP document though. :(

Which is a shame, cause until that is done we'll either continue 
having this discussion every now and then, or we'll see more and more 
MUAs implementing ad-hoc solutions (odd 'list reply' buttons and MFT 
headers). Anyway. :(

> That presumes the MUA generating replies can figure out what 
> 'poster' means (easy - use the Reply-To/From address) and what 
> 'list' means (not so easy if there is no List-Post field).

Indeed.

That's probably not a good idea. Again more scope for confusion.

> Actually, that is all beginning to look quite like the 
> Mail-Copies-To header sometimes used in News.

Right.

But it doesn't offer much extra though. (except that it avoids 
current bad Reply-To behaviour in some MUAs). If we were to have a 
new header like that i'd want it:

1. transitive (must be kept in replies)

2. additive (so people could add their own/further mailboxes to it,
    if they wanted)

3. Get rid of that ambigious 'never' thing it allows

Then it would be a useful addition to the Reply-To header I think.

But that's me.

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma	[email protected]	[email protected]	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
He who renders warfare fatal to all engaged in it will be the greatest
benefactor the world has yet known.
 		-- Sir Richard Burton