Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id SAA29744; Fri, 25 Aug 1995 18:51:14 -0400 X-Resent-To: drums@CS.UTK.EDU ; Fri, 25 Aug 1995 18:51:13 EDT Errors-to: owner-drums@CS.UTK.EDU Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id SAA29735; Fri, 25 Aug 1995 18:51:05 -0400 Message-Id: <199508252251.SAA29735@CS.UTK.EDU> Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 4753; Sat, 26 Aug 95 00:46:09 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin ERIC@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2b/1.8b) with RFC822 id 7423; Sat, 26 Aug 1995 00:46:09 +0200 Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 00:41:00 +0200 From: Eric Thomas Subject: Re: Getting back on track (a.k.a. Reply-To:) To: Keith Moore , "Michael D'Errico" cc: drums@CS.UTK.EDU In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 24 Aug 1995 09:15:30 -0700 from Michael D'Errico On Thu, 24 Aug 1995 09:15:30 -0700 Michael D'Errico said: >if there was a way to flag a message as being from a list, perhaps with >a new header instead of looking for owner-* or *-request return-paths, >then this could be gradually implemented and "Reply-to: the-list" >headers would eventually go away. Unfortunately, the situation is more complex than it seems. There are people forwarding private mail to lists, people forwarding mail from a list to a colleague, people forwarding mail from a list to another list, lists subscribed to lists, peered lists, gatewayed lists, etc. The behaviour of each of these actions would not only have to be documented, it would have to be *consistent*, because people won't want to use something that doesn't work consistently when there is a cheap solution available. In order to get consistent behaviour, all the MUAs would have to be modified. That is, it would not work well in a mix of old and new MUAs, which is what you would get in the real world. If it were as simple as adding a tag like "List-Name: XYZ@ABC.DEF", I would have done that a long time ago. Eric