From nanog-bounces+bonomi=mail.r-bonomi.com@nanog.org Tue Jul 12 11:29:29 2011 Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 12:22:09 -0400 (EDT) From: Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com> To: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: Spam?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Bush" <randy@psg.com>
Also, where is the reply to header?
still in the garbage, where it belongs
NANOG, being a traditional, (semi-)public, technical mailing list, has never had a Reply-to header, and never should. I concur with the people who assert that adding the Reply-to header formally violates the relevant RFCs, quite aside from the Real World problems it can (and *has*) caused.
*SIGH* One more "problem" with the 'new system', Messages through it _have_ a Reply-to: header. Set to the putative email of the sender, no less.