I've been reading RFC 2822 on the subject of Reply-To and noticed
that the content of Reply-To is a list. ie you can have more than
one address listed under a Reply-To:
reply-to = "Reply-To:" address-list CRLF
address-list = (address *("," address)) / obs-addr-list
address = mailbox / group
mailbox = name-addr / addr-spec
name-addr = [display-name] angle-addr
angle-addr = [CFWS] "<" addr-spec ">" [CFWS] / obs-angle-addr
group = display-name ":" [mailbox-list / CFWS] ";" [CFWS]
display-name = phrase
mailbox-list = (mailbox *("," mailbox)) / obs-mbox-list
eg:
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This would seem to potentially remove one of the complaints on
Reply-To: lists -- that they nix/kill crossposting, and lose the
actual semantic value of the original Reply-To header.
Ergo, if a given list is configured to do reply-To munging and it
receives a message with Reply-To set, then it makes sense to _ADD_
the list's address to the Reply-To: header if present, rather than
replacing it.
--
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
_______________________________________________
Mailman-Developers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers
