Barry Leiba wrote:
What I'm interested in community input on is
whether the mechanism of transferring the information back and forth
between the two, and having SMTP protocol get involved in inspecting and
altering header fields is a good thing.
I may be too old school, but I still believe "thou shall not tamper
with mail" in principle, especially passthru.
Only with Network related control lines/headers that the transports
deal with. If this header is one of these, I don't see an issue.
Also, in regards of the transport even processing the headers (which
suggest analyzing the payload at DATA before the EOD response is
issued), past concerns included the "delay factor", the scalability
question, the dupe potentials, the current 10 min "timeout" too long
and not always supported by clients, including ideas of using a "Keep
Alive" for DATA shims that take too long.
If I understand where you going with this, IMV, I don't think it is a
good thing SMTP systems should be expected will be processing the
payload or its headers before the EOD is issued.
--
HLS
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf