On 05/01/2014 09:26 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
If first_strip_reply_to = No there are two possible situations which aren't covered in your (much improved!) self-doc. Either the original poster included a Reply-To:, or not. If not, then I assume the original From: address is put into the Reply-To: address. Yes?
Yes.
If the original poster included a Reply-To: address then DMARC forces us into a situation in which we can't avoid information loss. Either the poster's Reply-To: is overwritten with the original From:, or the original Reply-To: is retained and the original From: address is lost. Which is it?
Neither. The poster's From: address is merged with the other addresses in the original Reply-To:. I.e. The Poster's From: address will be there as will all the other addresses in the original Reply-To:, but there will be no duplicates.
What do I need to change to make this clear. Note that earlier under the Munge From action, it says "... and adds the poster's address to the Reply-To: header" and under the Wrap Message action it says "with the original From: address added to the Reply-To: header".
So it seems clear to me that we're *adding* the From: address to Reply-To: and the only question is how does first_strip_reply_to affect this, and the answer is if it's Yes, the Reply-To: we're adding to was stripped and is empty, and if No we're adding to the original. Do I have to repeat that last bit further down?
Maybe instead of "the Reply-To: header" in the two action statements, I should say "the addresses in the original Reply-To: header". I.e. "... and adds the poster's address to the addresses in the original Reply-To: header" and "with the original From: address added to the addresses in the original Reply-To: header". Does that help?
-- Mark Sapiro mark@msapiro.net The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan