Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 9 Mar 1996 13:13:41 +0000 (GMT) | From | Robert de Bath <> | Subject | Re: (EMail addresses |
| |
On Thu, 7 Mar 1996, lilo wrote:
> Received: from nic.funet.fi (nic.funet.fi [128.214.248.6]) by mail.compulink.co.uk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA13443 for <lists@mayday.compulink.co.uk>; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 17:03:02 GMT > From: lilo <lilo@lions.reseq.ungov> > Reply-To: lilo <TaRDiS@mail.utexas.edu> > To: Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de> > Subject: Re: (EMail addresses
> On Wed, 6 Mar 1996, Ulrich Windl wrote: > > > I usually reply directly, but I couldn't. I'd strongly encourage > > everybody to use valid EMail envelopes (headers): > > ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- > > Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 15:40:47 +0100 > > Reply-to: postmaster@listserv.gmd.de > > From: "LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a" <postmaster@listserv.gmd.de> > > Sorry. Apparently my reply-to didn't/doesn't survive this mailing list > processor. Well, it got here (eventually!) so it doesn't look like it's vger that's the problem (or nic.funet.fi for that matter)
> lilo -- Rob. (Robert de Bath <robert@mayday.compulink.co.uk>)
| |