Errors-to: owner-drums@CS.UTK.EDU
Message-Id: <199508151511.IAA07666@mastodon.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
To: perry@piermont.com
From: Eric Allman <eric@CS.Berkeley.EDU>
cc: ietf-drums <drums@CS.UTK.EDU>
Subject: Re: "Reply-To" 
In-reply-to: Mail from "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@panix.com> 
	dated Tue, 15 Aug 1995 11:00:34 EDT
	<199508151500.LAA20031@panix4.panix.com> 
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 1995 08:11:55 -0700
Sender: eric@mastodon.CS.Berkeley.EDU

I'm not arguing that there are many _possible_ semantics -- but as
Robert pointed out, you CAN change your From: line to have the
appropriate address (which would work even for UAs that don't grok
Reply-To) -- just because you don't choose to do it this way doesn't
mean you couldn't.

eric


============= In Reply To: ==============================================
: From:  "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@panix.com>
: Subject:  Re: "Reply-To" 
: Date:  Tue, 15 Aug 1995 11:00:34 -0400

: 
: Eric Allman writes:
: > I have to agree with Robert's logic here -- I had forgotten that
: > From: is settable (and can even be multi-valued).  I certainly
: > have seen Reply-To: commonly used to indicate "please send
: > replies to me only and not to the distribution list" -- that is,
: > Reply-To: and From: are identical.  In fact, this is probably
: > the single most useful purpose for the header.
: 
: Not to quibble, but there is another very useful purpose: those of us
: who have lots of places we send mail from but only one we get it
: delivered to tend to use Reply-To: for the purpose of pointing our
: mail at one spot and not to indicate "please only send me the
: reply". I've been using it as such for years now and it seems to have
: always worked. (This very message is being sent by way of Panix, an
: ISP in NYC, but has a Reply-to: perry@piermont.com on it.)
: 
: .pm