POV-Ray: Newsgroups: povray.off-topic: How should a ReplyTo: be handled by an OutOfOffice message?: Re: How should a ReplyTo: be handled by an OutOfOffice message?

POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : How should a ReplyTo: be handled by an OutOfOffice message? : Re: How should a ReplyTo: be handled by an OutOfOffice message?		Server Time 29 Jul 2024 02:35:11 EDT (-0400)

From: andrel
Date: 18 Jul 2012 18:40:00
Message: <50073B41.3040801@gmail.com>

On 18-7-2012 23:40, clipka wrote:
> Am 18.07.2012 21:13, schrieb andrel:
>> I am using a number of different e-mails. Sometimes I find it useful to
>> supply a ReplyTo: field. At our hospital e-mail is handled by a
>> Outlook2010 server, that will send out of office messages to the From:
>> field address and not the ReplyTo: . Today I noticed that also another
>> mail server (type unknown) does this. Anyone know if this behaviour is
>> correct, permitted, or a bug?
>
>  From RFC 5322 (emphasis added):
> --------------------------------------------------------
>     [...] When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it
>     indicates the address(es) to which the author of the message SUGGESTS
>     that replies be sent.
> --------------------------------------------------------

Thanks, so it is from the permitted category. Silly but allowed.

Any suggestion why you would prefer to not follow the suggestion?
Perhaps anything to do with SPAM?

Post a reply to this message