Date   : Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:29:25 +0000
From   : pete@... (Pete Turnbull)
Subject: Who the message is from...

On 07/11/2009 23:10, Phill Harvey-Smith wrote:
> Kevin Bracey wrote:
>> Rick Murray wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I know this has been gone over before - although I am wondering if there 
>>> is any *technical* reason why the "From" attribution in this mailing 
>>> list is not the mailing list itself?

The "From" is correct, it's the "Reply-To" that might be debatable.  The 
"From" field is required to indicate the author of the message; the 
"Reply-To" is intended to override that, for replies, and if present, 
must do so.

> None at all.
> 
>> Hello folks,
>>
>> I've just joined the list today, 
>> and it looks perfectly configured to 
>> me. So admins - please don't mess with it!
> 
> Odd you're the first person round here that has said that in the 12 
> months or so that I have been on the list.

And one of very few ever to say so, actually :-)

>> * The From and Reply-To fields are the real ones from the person sending 
>> the list, as they should be.
>> * There's a List-Id header which lets you filter accurately.
>> * And there's a List-Post header which tells a good list-aware e-mail 
>> client where to send replies to the list.
>>
>> This sort of thing comes up periodically on mailing lists from people 
>> who are having troubles with their e-mail client, but all the 
>> alternatives to this correct configuration are worse. Your suggestion, 
>> in particular, would make it hard to send private replies, and probably 
>> cause embarrassing cock-ups.

Not at all. Every email client I've used can deal with that.  Yes, it 
requires a different action, but it isn't hard.

> Except that in my experience the majority of mailing lists are 
> configured to send replies by default back to the list, so people expect 
> this to be the default behavior.

Indeed, and I agree, because this list, like others, is a *discussion* 
list, and therefore it is proper that the replies are returned to the 
list in the normal case.

>> A good e-mail client like Messenger Pro will present a mailing list 
>> pretty much exactly as a Usenet newsgroup, and it functions like one. 
> 
> Humm except that if you send a reply on usenet, the reply, unless you 
> specifically reply by email goes to the whole group by *DEFAULT*.

Exactly :-)

>> But that relies on the list not mucking around with From and Reply-To 
>> headers. Thunderbird, which I'm currently using, isn't that good, but 
>> works adequately filtering on List-Id and using Reply-to-all.
>>
>> Here's a web page on the topic of mailing list configuration:
>>
>> http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.html
> 
> And that's just one point of view, and what makes this person any more 
> qualified to hold fourth on this subject than any of us. Really this 
> comes across as saying "the configuration of the list is correct cause 
> this guy says so ok".

Indeed, and that page is incorrect in its conclusion, where it states 
'Your list software is not "the author of the message", so it must not 
set or in any way meddle with the Reply-To header field. That field 
exists for the author and the author alone. If your list munges it, you 
are violating the standard.'  Not so, if the author intended the email 
for a discussion list, and the RFC quoted earlier in the page allows for 
that.

-- 
Pete                                           Peter Turnbull
                                               Network Manager
                                               University of York