At 11:55 PM 6/29/00 +0300, Mikko Hänninen wrote:
[...]
>I'm also not aware of whether there is any specified way to have
>Reply-To set to more than one address. You can either have multiple
>Reply-To headers, one address per header, or you can have multiple
>addresses in one header. I think that in either case, the behaviour
>of MUAs is unspecified, so you may and will get random results. Does
>anyone know more about this?
It's perfectly fine, and has been since at least RFC-822 (1982).
Of course, that doesn't mean that there aren't broken MUAs out there...
Cheers,
Stan
ps - your post said Reply-To you, but MFT the list and Hugo.
What should that combination mean, I wonder?
