[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [2822upd] Resent-* MUSTard

2007-04-30 20:42:36

On 5/1/07 at 3:46 AM +0200, Frank Ellermann wrote:

2822 gives no reason why there's an offending MUST NOT about Resent-* in automatic processing.

2822 does not say that Resent-* "MUST NOT be used in automatic processing". Don't partially quote. Read it again, in context.

As for why: It is because there was confusion about what MUAs ought to do with those fields, and using them for the reply command, and "*OTHER SUCH* actions" (was enough emphasis added?) would do the wrong thing.

I use MIME when I forward mails or news, not Resent-*

Resent-* are *never* used when you "forward". That is also said in quite clearly in 3.6.6 (in the Note).

but even if I'd use Resent-* I don't see why there could be multiple "authors"

So you've backed off of your original argument about the need for Resent-Sender (because it is needed when Resent-From is not identical to the sender) and you're just complaining about Ned's example?

I think it's more important for interoperability of implementations to keep the syntax of Resent-From and From identical (and the way it's always been) than to go verify that nobody is using this particular feature.

Why can't we deprecate this rubbish in favour of the much clearer MIME forwarding ?

Because it is not forwarding. It is resending. And I, and a bunch of other folks that I know, will scream bloody murder if you take that feature out of our mail clients. Forwarding (MIME or otherwise) does not have the same functionality as resending and therefore does not address the same problem.

Pete Resnick <>
QUALCOMM Incorporated

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>