From: "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 11:49:36 +0800
To: rah@shipwright.com
Subject: Re: (flatulence): Reply-to loops
Message-ID: <01I8TLQPNVKG9JDG1J@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


From:	IN%"rah@shipwright.com"  "Robert Hettinga" 28-AUG-1996 02:44:31.09

>We don't do it because of reply-to loops.

>Only idiots, or charitably, those with very low traffic, run their mail
>lists any other way.

>Accidentally sending private e-mail to the list is bad enough without
>bringing the listserver to its knees...

	Umm... only one other list I'm on does reply-to to something other than
the list, and some of those lists are running majordomo. Reply-to to the list
doesn't have to cause problems; only a few domains (compuserve.com, wow.com,
and one other that I can't remember offhand) cause error problems to reply-to
addresses. The point about low volume mailing lists vs high volume ones is,
however, a good point; the other list with reply-to to other than the list
that I'm on is one designed for low traffic.
	-Allen