The EAI WG found it was fine to remove the obligation to have an email address 
part in the mandatory RFC5322.From header, leaving only the display part to 
assert the original author. 

So it seems that "IETF" is not completely in agreement on how to preserve the 
original author in emails. 

So I think the example showed by Terry is as good as what is in EAI and this is 
a matter of taste and UI designs, UI design and functions that usually the IETF 
avoids to deal with... 


From: "Terry Zink" <tz...@exchange.microsoft.com> 
To: "Ted Lemon" <mel...@fugue.com> 
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org, "IETF" <i...@ietf.org> 
Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 2:54:33 PM 
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Identification of an email author (was - Re: IETF 
Mailing Lists and DMARC) 



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@ietf.org and i...@ietf.org on the cc. 




From: Ted Lemon [mailto:mel...@fugue.com] 
Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 2:23 PM 
To: Terry Zink <tz...@exchange.microsoft.com> 
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org; IETF <i...@ietf.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 < tz...@exchange.microsoft.com > wrote: 





And if there were something like this in other headers that retains the 
original senders: 





Reply-To: originalsen...@example.com 
Sender: dmarc < dmarc-boun...@ietf.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. 







_______________________________________________ 
dmarc mailing list 
dmarc@ietf.org 
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc 
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to