In <488E93C3(_dot_)2050609(_at_)winserver(_dot_)com> Hector Santos
<winserver(_dot_)support(_at_)winserver(_dot_)com> writes:
In my view, the conflictive issues are:
1) Servers which employ automatic purging of old messages
MAY let this field influence the purging process.
or
2) Servers which employ automatic purging of old messages
MUST NOT let this field influence the purging process.
or
3) Servers which employ automatic purging of old messages
SHOULD NOT let this field influence the purging process
without USER PERMISSION.
But what do you mean be "servers" here? Surely you don't mean MTAs,
because they are not in the business of storing messages (beyond maybe for
7 days or so trying to deliver a message, after which then bounce it back
up the Return-Path as "undeliverable")?
Or do you mean IMAP and POP servers? AFAICS, those are the _only_ places
where some semantic action connected with the Expires header MIGHT be
specified, and even there it would have to be a user-configurable option.
But that is a matter to be dealt with in some future IMAP-bis or POP-bis
standard.
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clerew(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave,
CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5