On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Frank Ellermann wrote:
Tom Petch wrote:
Less good is
postmaster@<domain-name>
since, while technically correct, it is unlikely to convey the
meaning clearly to a lay user, especially as the <domain-name>
may be unknown to the user.
...
I have always found the overuse of the pronoun "localhost" in DSN messages
a stumbling block to quick understanding. Substituting the actual host
name wouldn't cost anything, would it? I understand there is no actual
ambiguity, just a delay while the user figures it out (or gives up
trying).
If the DSN included the message-id, it would be possible to automate the
dropping of DSN messages arising from forged return addresses on messages
to misconfigured MTAs. Most of the DSNs I get have the subject line, but
few have the message-id. If no reasonably reliable way to determine the
legitimacy of a DSN is established, then more MTAs will start discarding
all of them, which would be significant reduction in service and not at
all desirable.
Daniel Feenberg
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg