[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Discard vs. DSN

1999-03-23 15:03:38
The problem arises if an implementation cannot implement discard 
without generating a NDN.

Then it hasn't implemented discard; it has implemented reject.

I agree emphatically; thanks for the consise statement.

We seem to be stuck between the following two mutually exclusive positions:

1) Discard is a vital service, and MUST be supported even if it cannot be
   supported correctly.


2) A Discard MUST NOT generate a DSN; if the implementation has no way to
   silently dispose of a message, than it does not support Discard.

I'm voting for #2. To me it makes no sense for the semantics of discard to
vary in different implementations, no matter how well documented. If I try to
give a SIEVE script to an implementation that always generates a DSN, I *want*
'discard' to return a syntax error.


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