Re: user-visible goals

Doug,


DR> Some do not like the REPLY-TO set, other like me feel then need it set.

DR> Adding some kind of "if it is for the list  - reply to this emai address"
DR> or if it is for the person use this reply-to address. This may be more of
DR> a MUA than protocol issue. But it is a topic I have seen on several lists.

The RFC2822 effort included extensive discussion that tried to fix the
problem created by overloading the function of reply-to.  it's
list-related uses really gave the field a second meaning.

My own feeling is that the only way to fix this is to move the
list-related functionality to a separate header, such as Follow-up.
However the ability to make this be really useful, given the challenge
of changing the installed bases' behavior, has prevented pursuing the
change.

It is worth noting the the list-subscription headers often used now
provide an MUA with a way of detecting that this is list email.  Hence
it could at least try to treat reply-to differentially.  That would
not be a perfect solution.  Reply is still sometimes set by the author
and other times set by the mailing list agent, so there is no way to
be sure what its semantics really are.


d/
--
 Dave Crocker <dcrocker-at-brandenburg-dot-com>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <www.brandenburg.com>
 Sunnyvale, CA  USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>