| > There is another twist on this. I venture to say that a Sieve
| implementation
| > MAY choose to forward a message using MIME encapsulation. In such a case
| > resent headers MUST NOT be inserted. This should be enough for seriously
| > considering Alan's suggestion.
|
| I venture to say that it must not. Have you missed the following
| paragraph from the -04 Sieve spec?:
|
| The forward command performs an MTA-style forward--that is, what you
| get from a .forward file using sendmail under UNIX. The address on
| the SMTP envelope is replaced with the one on the forward command and
| the message is sent back out. (This is not an MUA-style forward,
| which creates a new message with a different sender and message ID,
| wrapping the old message in a new one.)
I've lost some antecedents in this discussion. What part of "Alan's
suggestion" are you disagreeing with, Barry? That there is a need for
"resend" itself, or with Tomas' suggestion that "forward" possibly do a
MIME-wrapped resend?
Alan, compare the "I venture to say" phrases, which was the clue to
what I was talking about. To spell it out, my post was only taking
issue with Tomas's statement that one could implement "forward" in
the manner he suggested. I said nothing more, and I meant nothing
more. (In fact, I don't care much what the decision about the "resent"
tags is, so I didn't comment on it.)
Barry Leiba, Multimedia Messaging (leiba(_at_)watson(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com)
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/l/leiba