On Fri, 19 Oct 2001 17:44:29 -0400 Barry A Warsaw <barry@zope.com> wrote:
Field Min number Max number Notes reply-to 0 1
Thanks.
Are you suggesting that we collapse Reply-To: even if we don't add one ourselves?
No. I specifically think we should collapse duplicate list addresses in the Reply-To. Duplicate other addresses in the Reply-To are likely not good, but are also not our responsibility.
Note: This does expose an abuse vector:
I don't like Bubba.
I send a troll to a busy list with Reply-To set to Bubba.
Bubba is inundated with unwanted mail.
There is little/nothing Bubba can do about it.
I get away clean.
This abuse vector currently exists for non-reply-to munging lists. The only difference is that with the change I'm advocating is that it now also exists for reply-to munging lists where it didn't before.
Its easy to view this as either a Good or Bad Thing. I side on adding to any extant Reply-To being a Good Thing in balance.
I would think that we should only collapse if we're adding a value.
Agreed.
-- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.