[Mailman-Users] Reply-to options not working

[Mark Sapiro]

On 01/30/2018 06:46 PM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote:
> 
> I wonder if that hints at another option when munging the From: (i.e.
> for DMARC reason).  Add the author (read: the original From:) as a
> Reply-To and set the mailing list as From:.  That would provide the
> original author information that many people want and (correctly)
> complain that From: munging hides.


The Munge From DMARC mitigations do essentially that. The message From:
Joe User <user at dmarc.example.com> gets sent From: Joe User via Listname
<listname at example.net> and has the original From: in either Reply-To: or
Cc: depending on some settings according to these goals.

>     # MAS: We need to do some things with the original From: if we've munged
>     # it for DMARC mitigation.  We have goals for this process which are
>     # not completely compatible, so we do the best we can.  Our goals are:
>     # 1) as long as the list is not anonymous, the original From: address
>     #    should be obviously exposed, i.e. not just in a header that MUAs
>     #    don't display.
>     # 2) the original From: address should not be in a comment or display
>     #    name in the new From: because it is claimed that multiple domains
>     #    in any fields in From: are indicative of spamminess.  This means
>     #    it should be in Reply-To: or Cc:.
>     # 3) the behavior of an MUA doing a 'reply' or 'reply all' should be
>     #    consistent regardless of whether or not the From: is munged.
>     # Goal 3) implies sometimes the original From: should be in Reply-To:
>     # and sometimes in Cc:, and even so, this goal won't be achieved in
>     # all cases with all MUAs.  In cases of conflict, the above ordering of
>     # goals is priority order.


-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan