If you hit “Reply-All”, at least when I use Gmail, it includes both the From:
and the Reply-To using the scheme below (I tested it out just now). In Outlook
desktop I have to also copy/paste the From: address (mailing list). It’s not
ideal in Outlook desktop, but I can live with it.
In this email discussion, I hit Reply-All and includes Ted on the To:, and
dmarc(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org<mailto:dmarc(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org> and
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org<mailto:ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org> on the cc.
From: Ted Lemon [mailto:mellon(_at_)fugue(_dot_)com]
Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 2:23 PM
To: Terry Zink <tzink(_at_)exchange(_dot_)microsoft(_dot_)com>
Cc: dmarc(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; IETF <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Identification of an email author (was - Re: IETF
Mailing Lists and DMARC)
On Nov 4, 2016, at 4:21 PM, Terry Zink
<tzink(_at_)exchange(_dot_)microsoft(_dot_)com<mailto:tzink(_at_)exchange(_dot_)microsoft(_dot_)com>>
wrote:
And if there were something like this in other headers that retains the
original senders:
Reply-To:
originalSender(_at_)example(_dot_)com<mailto:originalSender(_at_)example(_dot_)com>
Sender: dmarc
<dmarc-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org<mailto:dmarc-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>>
I don’t think this is quite right—I think the Reply-To needs to include all of
the senders or else every reply will be an off-list reply (would cut down on
noise, admittedly). Otherwise this would be a great solution. But because
of the way it interacts with MUAs, I do not think it would work in a way that
doesn’t violate the principle of least surprise.