Setup of DNS caching name server for home server

[Ed Greshko]

Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 15:08:59 +0800,
>   Ed Greshko <Ed.Greshko at greshko.com> wrote:
>   
>> As an aside, I wonder why your email client seems to be ignoring the
>> "Reply-To:" in this list mails.  I'm "trained" to only use "Reply" with
>> this and other mailing lists and only just noticed that doing so
>> resulted in a "To:" to you only and I had to manually adjust.
>>     
>
> That isn't the correct way to do things. Reply is supposed to reply just
> to the to address (or the reply-to address if that is present). To reply
> to the list, you either want to do reply to all or reply to list. There
> are disagreements on what is best there.
>   
I think you miss my point....

If you look at the emails "From" me they show...

From: Ed Greshko <Ed.Greshko at greshko.com>
To: Fedora <fedora-list at redhat.com>
Reply-To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using
Fedora." <fedora-list at redhat.com>

And when you reply to that....I'm seeing...

To: Ed Greshko <Ed.Greshko at greshko.com>
Cc: Fedora <fedora-list at redhat.com>

Which isn't what it should be and certainly not what happens with the
vast majority of posters..

> You are probably getting a copy directly from me instead of through the
> list. I think some of the fedora lists break reply-to by putting the
> list address in there, which you really aren't supposed to do. When I
> find lists like that, I often have a filter remove the broken reply-to
> headers. Unfortunately when this is done on a list wide basis it will
> break things for the people that have configured their clients to use
> reply-to to direct replies back on to the lists in all cases.
> (mail-followup-to is a better way to do this.)
>
> I'll try to remember to go back and check the configuration of the various
> fedora lists to see which ones if any, mung reply-to headers and make sure
> I am not removing reply-to headers from any lists that aren't munging
> the headers. The last time I looked was several years ago.
>   
Well....  All I know is that yours is the only email/poster where I've
seen this behavior in a very long time....  So, I am more inclined to
expect your end as being the problem.... 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20090925/b66fcde1/attachment-0001.bin