Errors-to: owner-drums@CS.UTK.EDU
Message-Id: <199508251919.PAA13062@wilma.cs.utk.edu>
To: drums@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject: From the Chair: the Reply-To issue
cc: moore@CS.UTK.EDU
From: Keith Moore <moore@CS.UTK.EDU>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 15:19:25 -0400
Sender: moore@CS.UTK.EDU

I want to close out this issue within the next few days.

My estimate of what we have rough concensus on is as follows:

[ ] reply-to is primarily intended to allow the original
    author of the message to state his preference as to where
    replies to this message should be sent

[ ] reply-to MAY be added by a mailing list to encourage readers to
    reply to the list and/or the orignal author.  

[ ] reply-to MAY be used by a sender to encourage replies to go to
    her primary mailbox, though it's probably better to use From
    for this purpose if the sender's UA supports doing so.

(All of the above appear to be consistent with RFC 822, section 4.4.3;
however, the use of the From field could be considered a slight change.)

[ ] while a UA SHOULD respect reply-to when generating replies,
    in practice, recipients can reply to anyone they want to.

I don't yet see concensus on:

[ ] whether or not lists should be discouraged from munging reply-to

[ ] whether reply-to is intended to allow the original author
    of a message to state his preference as to where replies
    to HIM should be sent (note contrast from above)

If you've already stated your opinion on some or all of these, it
shouldn't be necessary to do so again, other than perhaps a yes/no on
the items above if needed to clarify your position.

I know from private email that there are some WG members who haven't
expressed their opinions about this to the list.  If you intend to do
so, now is the appropriate time.

Keith