Subj : OpenXP 5.0.48 released
To   : Martin Foster
From : Oli
Date : Sat Jan 02 2021 15:00:09

Martin wrote (2021-01-01):

 O>> There is no "REPLYTO" kludge in Fidonet,

 MF> Oh?

 MF> = FUTURE4FIDO (2:310/31.3)
 MF> ==================================================== Msg  : 51 of 101
 MF>                       Snt From : Benny Pedersen
 MF> 2:460/58        02 Dec 20 12:05:12 To   : All
 MF>   Subj : ...
 MF> ===============================================================================
 MF> @MSGID: 2:460/58 0000054d
 MF> @PID: tg_BBS_v0.6.2
 MF> @CHRS: CP866 2
 MF> @TGUID: 270364579
 MF> @REPLYTO 2:460/58 270364579
 MF> Hello :)

 MF> --- tg BBS v0.6.2
 MF>   * Origin: Fido by Telegram BBS by Stas Mishchenkov (2:460/58)
 MF> ===============================================================================

Sorry, I was confused and thought it had something to do with the MSGID and reply linking. I saw REPLYID kludges generated by some software and replyTo is used internally by some message base formats.

I still don't understand what the REPLYTO kludge is good for in this case. It is also unspecified as a single kludge and not covered by any standard or proposal. There is FSC-0035 (http://ftsc.org/docs/fsc-0035.001) which defines REPLYADDR *and* REPLYTO in combination (both have to be included in the message).

Using the REPLYTO address and ignoring the REPLYADDR could cause issues and is not a correct implementation of FSC-0035. If this is not intended to be an implementation of FSC-0035, maybe the Telegram Gateway and OpenXP should use another kludge.

---
 * Origin:  (2:280/464.47)

.