Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:
I'm curious to know what people think of this idea.
I like the way it behave on legacy clients. In comparison,
Mail-Followup-To and Mail-Reply-To doesn't work if a client isn't
aware of those headers.
I dislike that it require modification to the "submission" phase. I
think one could argue that it is _more_ difficult to change submission
agents ("sendmail -t") AND all mail clients that do SMTP internally,
than it is to change only mail clients to support the MFT/MRT
approach.
Further, either the proposal or I am missing something: How can the
sender of a messages indicate that she _herself_ doesn't want to
receive any further replies?
I believe avoiding private e-mail copies to yourself is probably the
primary reason people use Mail-Followup-To and Mail-Reply-To. If
NoReply do not support this mode, people will continue to use MFT/MRT.
In that case, it might be better to standardize MFT/MRT instead, but
perhaps the "Not Invented Here" syndrome prevent that.
Thanks,
Simon