Hi Jack! Am 23.05.20 18:44 schrieb(en) Jack via balsa-list:
Not specifically Balsa related, but an email correspondent just asked my why my email didn't have a Reply-To: header. I always thought it was present, but I see not. Should it be, or should I just tell him it is HIS software that is wrong, since it should reply to the From: address if there isn't a Reply-To: ?
Quoting from RFC 5322, Section 3.6.2 (<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.6.2>):
3.6.2. Originator Fields The originator fields of a message consist of the from field, the sender field (when applicable), and optionally the reply-to field. […] In either case, an optional reply-to field MAY also be included, which contains the field name "Reply-To" and a comma-separated list of one or more addresses. […] The originator fields indicate the mailbox(es) of the source of the message. The "From:" field specifies the author(s) of the message, that is, the mailbox(es) of the person(s) or system(s) responsible for the writing of the message. […] The originator fields also provide the information required when replying to a message. When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it indicates the address(es) to which the author of the message suggests that replies be sent. In the absence of the "Reply-To:" field, replies SHOULD by default be sent to the mailbox(es) specified in the "From:" field unless otherwise specified by the person composing the reply.
IOW, if the message you sent contains a From: field (it will, as it is required), it /is/ well-formed, and a Reply-To: would be required /only/ if you want the reply to be transmitted to a different mailbox.
(his complaint is that he always needs to type my address in the To: field.)
Sounds as if that mailer is broken, or the From: field not being recognised properly for some strange reason. Best, Albrecht. P.S.: I didn't have time yet to look deeper into the MBox crash, as I'm fighting with a broken system update; it's not forgotten…
Attachment:
pgp4NBuFpd2tB.pgp
Description: PGP signature