Errors-to: owner-drums@CS.UTK.EDU
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 12:21:08 +0200 (GMT+0200)
From: Alan Barrett <barrett@iafrica.com>
To: Roger Fajman <RAF@CU.NIH.GOV>
cc: drums@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject: Re: From the Chair: the Reply-To issue
In-Reply-To: <199508252320.TAA01352@CS.UTK.EDU>
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.91.950828120542.6087C-100000@daisy.ee.und.ac.za>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

> [ ] where replies to the message probably should be sent
> 
>     (thus for the recipient to honor the sender's suggestion, the reply
>     goes to the addresses in the reply-to header rather than to any of the
>     other combinations)
> 
> That is, "sender" instead of "author" and "suggestion" instead of "wishes".
> It's the sender of the reply who knows best where it should go.

No, stick with "author" instead of "sender" throughout.

The "sender" field records the address of the entity that sent a message,
and that entity may be different from the entity that authorised sending
of the message.  It's the authorising entity, not the sending entity, that
should make decisions about where to send the message or what to put in
the "reply-to" field.  I think that the "from" field records the addresses
of the entities that authorised the sending of the message, and that they
are usually called the "authors" of the message. 

--apb (Alan Barrett)