Errors-to: owner-drums@CS.UTK.EDU
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 1995 17:17:54 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Jacob Palme <jpalme@dsv.su.se>
To: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.oz.au>
Cc: "Brent B. Welch" <Brent.Welch@eng.sun.com>, ietf-drums <drums@CS.UTK.EDU>
Subject: Re: your mail 
In-Reply-To: <17719.811278608@munnari.OZ.AU>
Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950917171239.4199D-100000@ester.dsv.su.se>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Sun, 17 Sep 1995, Robert Elz wrote:

> If you're going to go the route of inventing new headers, you
> will end up with a need for lots of foo-reply-to headers to
> express different desires.

I have not proposed more than two replacements. The reason
why I have proposed two and not more replacements is that
many mail systems have two different commands, or two variants
of the same command, meaning "reply personally" and "reply to
the group". The mail system designer needs to know which of
these commands is to be modified by a "Reply-To" statement
in the header.

(I am fully aware that mail systems also allow users to
send their replies anywhere they want. But that is not the
problem, because when people use this facility, they have
indicated by their choice of this facility that they know
what they are doing. The problem is that many people give
the "reply personally" or "reply to the group" command
expecting the computer to send the reply where they want
it to be sent.)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jacob Palme <jpalme@dsv.su.se> (Stockholm University and KTH)
for more info see URL: http://www.dsv.su.se/~jpalme