Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id RAA25297; Fri, 25 Aug 1995 17:48:24 -0400 X-Resent-To: drums@CS.UTK.EDU ; Fri, 25 Aug 1995 17:48:23 EDT Errors-to: owner-drums@CS.UTK.EDU Received: from info.cren.net by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id RAA25290; Fri, 25 Aug 1995 17:48:22 -0400 Received: from [192.52.179.12] (conklin-180c.cren.net [192.52.179.12]) by info.cren.net (8.6.12/8.6.4 (CREN)) with SMTP id RAA15586; Fri, 25 Aug 1995 17:48:16 -0400 Message-Id: <199508252148.RAA15586@info.cren.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 17:51:07 +0100 To: Mark Crispin From: conklin@info.cren.net (Jim Conklin) Subject: re: From the Chair: the Reply-To issue Cc: drums@CS.UTK.EDU At 1:18 PM 8/25/95 -0700, Mark Crispin wrote: > ... >I would argue for the following, which I would call "version 2": >[ ] reply-to in a message indicates where replies to this message > should be sent. > If a Reply-To address is present, the From address should NOT > be sent a reply. I wasn't smart enough to think of this, but I really like it! It avoids the nasty issues on which we can't agree and gets to the point of what REALLY needs to be specified. > ... >[ ] a UA SHOULD use reply-to when generating replies, and SHOULD NOT > use From. A UA MAY also use To and cc when generating replies, Add, after "From", above, "when a Reply-To header is present", which I feel sure was Mark's intent. > but this SHOULD NOT be the default behavior. > In practice, recipients can reply to anyone they want to. > ... THANKS, MARK! THANKS, KEITH! Jim