On 3/11/2019 5:44 PM, Michael Wise wrote: > It does appear that it did it correctly with my first reply, … but this > reply has it just to you. Initially.
So, the behavior is inconsistent for you, as well? Jesse > > A screenshot of a cell phone Description automatically generated > > Aloha, > > Michael. > > -- > > *Michael J Wise* > MicrosoftCorporation| Spam Analysis > > "Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed." > > Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool > <http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=18275>? > > *From:* mailop <mailop-boun...@mailop.org> *On Behalf Of *Jesse Thompson > via mailop > *Sent:* Monday, March 11, 2019 3:24 PM > *To:* mailop@mailop.org > *Subject:* [mailop] Mailing list with From header munging... and Outlook > > Hi all, > > We're making a push to get mailing lists to implement header munging > because of gov domains adopting DMARC p=reject. > > Does anyone know what's up with Outlook (Office 365 Pro Plus) when > "Reply All" is used? When someone reply-alls to a munged message it > only composes a message to the Reply-to and the Cc, but ignores the From > (the list address is munged into the From header). So, people need to > manually add the list address back if they want to reply-all back to the > list. Outlook on the Web seems to currently work as expected (event > though I have a recollection that I triggered the problematic behavior > last week.) > > Is there anything that can be done to trick Outlook into acting in the > way someone would expect with "Reply All"? Munge the list address into > an additional Reply-to (I'm fairly certain that multiple Reply-to > headers are allowed)? Munge it into the Cc header? > > cid:61087ee7-0af8-4ce1-96a9-9e87d092fb64 > > Thanks, > > Jesse > _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
