The one major objection I had to what was said in the LMAP document is
all the vague references to "changing semantics". I don't see how any
of the LMAP proposals seriously change any semantics, and this phrase
seems to have been latched onto and blown out of proportion by various
people. (Mostly people I don't recognize being involved discussions
on SPAM-L, NANAE, ASRG, SPF-discuss, etc.)
I believe that your refering to the following quotes:
"This document contains minor updates to the semantics of parts of RFC 2821"
" These proposals change the semantics of the MAIL FROM command
as defined in RFC 2821, section 3.3. to imply that the domain
in the source mailbox is also the responsible party for
sending the message, and thus must be verified.
"LMAP does not change SMTP, except for changing the semantics of the
mailbox used in MAIL FROM command."
I suggested to add those comments originally based on something Pete
Resnick brought up. In particular, I am basing this on section 4.4 of
" The primary purpose of the Return-path is to designate the address to
which messages indicating non-delivery or other mail system failures
are to be sent.