ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Asrg] ACK4

2003-05-21 12:33:42
Personally, I think the easiest solution to this problem is to modify
the
semantics of 250 after DATA such that in the case of a message with
multiple RCPT TO we shouldn't *require* that a notification be generated
for a "delivery failure" if this "failure" is an action requested by a
mailbox "owner".




If you're going to change SMTP,
I think it's better to create a new commands rather than modify old ones.

No, I don't believe so. A change such as I suggested is backward compatible
and works right away. I think. I'm not particularly attached to the idea.

In this case, I'd suggest two new commands.
Some disadvantages;
Only useful if both sender and receiver have implemented it.
Till then it's just dead code/wasted text in the specification.


You've raised the killer objection to your own idea.






--
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg



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