(Fwd) Re: (Fwd) Re: Off topic - replying ... [cut/paste for individual replies to list posts]

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> (Fwd) Re: (Fwd) Re: Off topic - replying ... [cut/paste for individual replies to list posts]

From: Eric D. Pierce <PierceED_at_csus.edu>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 14:19:52 -0700
Message-Id: <10543.110836@fatcity.com>

My interpretation of the RFC material below is that ListGuru *is* operating according to the RFC standards, and Outlook/Yahoo/etc are simply not robust clients (at least in what I would guess are their default configurations).

regards,
ep

cc: bbergman_at_BridgeMedical.com

Forwarded message follows ------- From: "Jan Muszynski" <jancm_at_bigfoot.com> Organization: Depends on the Moon phase To: "Eric D. Pierce" <PierceED_at_csus.edu>, PMAIL_at_bama.ua.edu Date sent: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 16:27:47 -0400 Subject: Re: (Fwd) Re: Off topic - replying [to another list]

On 29 Jun 2000, at 13:03, Eric D. Pierce wrote:

> Folks,
>
> Can anyone shed any light on the issues raised in the following
> discussion?
>
> thanks,
> ep

RFC 822 (where have I heard that number before :) )

-----Start RFC Extract-----
4.4.4. AUTOMATIC USE OF FROM / SENDER / REPLY-TO For systems which automatically generate address lists for replies to messages, the following recommendations are made:

The "Sender" field mailbox should be sent notices of any problems in transport or delivery of the original messages. If there is no "Sender" field, then the "From" field mailbox should be used.
The "Sender" field mailbox should NEVER be used automatically, in a recipient's reply message.
If the "Reply-To" field exists, then the reply should go to the addresses indicated in that field and not to the address(es) indicated in the "From" field.
If there is a "From" field, but no "Reply-To" field, the reply should be sent to the address(es) indicated in the "From" field.

Sometimes, a recipient may actually wish to communicate with the person that initiated the message transfer. In such cases, it is reasonable to use the "Sender" address.

This recommendation is intended only for automated use of originator-fields and is not intended to suggest that replies may not also be sent to other recipients of messages. It is up to the respective mail-handling programs to decide what additional facilities will be provided.
-----End RFC Extract-----

Note especially the last paragraph "and is not intended to suggest. . ."

The over-ride that is referred to in the discussion below is for automated responses *only* - there is nothing which states (and the RFC actually explicitly states otherwise) that a person should not be allowed to pick and choose where to send responses for themselves.

If people choose to use non-robust clients then they shouldn't complain when it doesn't give them robust options (and yes, I do consider LookOut to be a non-robust client)

As far as X-sender goes, I wouldn't expect a client to generate a potential response to that header. An X- header, by definition, is non-standard and client dependent.

HTH
Jan
>
>
> ------- Forwarded message follows -------
> From: Eric D. Pierce <PierceED_at_csus.edu>
> To: Chuck Hamilton
> <chuck_hamilton_at_yahoo.com>,ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com Subject:
> Re: Off topic - replying to items on this list Send reply to:
> PierceED_at_csus.edu Date sent: Thu, 29 Jun 2000
> 12:36:27 -0700
>
> On 29 Jun 2000, at 7:29, Chuck Hamilton wrote:
>
> Date sent: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 07:29:36 -0800
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com> Send reply to: ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com
> From: Chuck Hamilton <chuck_hamilton_at_yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Off topic - replying to items on this
> list
>
> > It's also a yahoo-ism, altavista-ism, lotus-notes-ism, and
> > any-email-client-that-proprtly-interprets-headers-ism.
>
> With all due respect, unless you can cite the specifics from an RFC
> (email standards document) proving that, I'm not sure this is true.
>
> Do you really think that Pine and Pegasus Mail are non-standard in
> how they offer "reply to" options?
>
> (I'm forwarding this to a list I'm on for email SysAdmns to ask for
> clarification.)
>
>
> >The headers
> > include a "reply-to" which is supposed to tell the client to
> > override the "from" header on replies.
>
> There is no "supposed to". Either you email program is capable of
> PROPERLY interpreting the Listguru headers, and offering you as a
> user a robust set of "reply" options, or it isn't, and in the latter
> case, you have to manually cut/paste.
>
> As you can see below, there are "reply to:" (the list address),
> "from:" (your personal address), AS WELL AS "x-sender" (also your
> personal address) fields in the full headers.
>
> Are you on a subscriber of any other other listserv-like services
> where you see things working differently?
>
> Why Outlook/yahoo/altavista/etc are not capable of "seeing" the
> "from:" or "x-sender:" when you first click reply, I don't know,
> but I doubt it is because ListGuru is a non-standard implementation!
>
>
> -----
>
> "raw" headers of your messsage, as revealed by "show full headers"
> in Pegasus Mail ( http://www.pmail.com ):
>
> ---begin raw Listguru header---
> Received: from SpoolDir by DSS_486 (Mercury 1.46); 29 Jun 00
> 11:52:10 -0700 Return-path: <root_at_fatcity.cts.com> Received: from
> csus.edu (130.86.90.1) by sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu (Mercury 1.46)
> with ESMTP;
> 29 Jun 00 11:52:02 -0700
> Received: from newsfeed.cts.com (newsfeed.cts.com [209.68.192.199])
> by csus.edu with ESMTP id LAA11448;
> Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:52:02 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: from fatcity.UUCP (uucp_at_localhost)
> by newsfeed.cts.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with UUCP id LAA13893;
> Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:51:57 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: by fatcity.com (04-May-2000/v1.0f-b69/bab) via UUCP id
> 00187A24; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 07:29:36 -0800 Message-ID:
> <F001.00187A24.20000629072936_at_fatcity.com> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000
> 07:29:36 -0800 To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com> X-Comment: Oracle RDBMS Community Forum
> X-Sender: Chuck Hamilton <chuck_hamilton_at_yahoo.com> Sender:
> root_at_fatcity.com Reply-To: ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com Errors-To:
> ML-ERRORS_at_fatcity.com From: Chuck Hamilton
> <chuck_hamilton_at_yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Off topic - replying to
> items on this list Organization: Fat City Network Services, San
> Diego, California X-ListServer: v1.0f, build 69; ListGuru (c)
> 1996-2000 Bruce A. Bergman Precedence: bulk Mime-Version: 1.0
> X-PMFLAGS: 570950016 0 1 Y02470.CNM Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset=us-ascii
>
> ---end raw header-
>
>
> >I find it annoying that I
> > have to cut and paste email addresses to do a simple reply-all and
> > include the original sender.
>
> Yes, that is certainly understandable, but the question is, if
> Outlook/etc. are non-standard implementations, why should ListGuru
> have to be recoded to "reward" them for such? In that case, you
> ought to be complaining to MS/Yahoo/etc, not to the ListGuru people.
>
> regards,
> ep
>
> >
> > bill thater <thaterw_at_telergy.net> wrote:
> > On Jun 28, Diane Whitehead scribbled on the wall in glitter
> > crayon:
> >
> >
> > ->Is this a feature of this list, or a feature of Microsoft
> > outlook, or ->something individuals have selected?
> >
> > i think it may be an outlookism, since i can choose to reply to
Received on Thu Jun 29 2000 - 16:19:52 CDT