ietf-822
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Understanding response protocols

2005-06-03 06:36:28

On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Charles Lindsey wrote:

Well, as MFT is currently implemented, either it gets filled in by the mailing list administrator (according to whatever the "list policy" is), or by the original poster - something like

   Mail-Followup-To: 
me(_at_)mydomain(_dot_)example,list-address(_at_)list(_dot_)example

For a man who wants personal as well as list replies. But to provide that funtionality conveniently requires the poster's MUA to be configured with a list of known mailing lists, and how the MFT is to be formed for each.

It would be better if there were a couple of keywords so you could say

   Mail-Followup-To: poster,list

and configure that for all lists you subscribe to.

To be honest, I'd rather see some kind of 'best-practice for Reply-To' document than MFT. Reply-To, in an ideal world, should work just as well. The only reason for MFT, it seems, is just to avoid bogus behaviour in MTAs wrt Reply-To.

I dont seem to having much success in my last mail asking whether it'd be an idea to draft such a BCP document though. :(

Which is a shame, cause until that is done we'll either continue having this discussion every now and then, or we'll see more and more MUAs implementing ad-hoc solutions (odd 'list reply' buttons and MFT headers). Anyway. :(

That presumes the MUA generating replies can figure out what 'poster' means (easy - use the Reply-To/From address) and what 'list' means (not so easy if there is no List-Post field).

Indeed.

That's probably not a good idea. Again more scope for confusion.

Actually, that is all beginning to look quite like the Mail-Copies-To header sometimes used in News.

Right.

But it doesn't offer much extra though. (except that it avoids current bad Reply-To behaviour in some MUAs). If we were to have a new header like that i'd want it:

1. transitive (must be kept in replies)

2. additive (so people could add their own/further mailboxes to it,
   if they wanted)

3. Get rid of that ambigious 'never' thing it allows

Then it would be a useful addition to the Reply-To header I think.

But that's me.

regards,
--
Paul Jakma      paul(_at_)clubi(_dot_)ie        paul(_at_)jakma(_dot_)org       
Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
He who renders warfare fatal to all engaged in it will be the greatest
benefactor the world has yet known.
                -- Sir Richard Burton