[Top] [All Lists]

Re: vacation and envelope-to: another try

2005-05-04 14:40:12

On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 06:39:46PM +0200, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
On Wed, 2005-05-04 at 17:48 +0200, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
IMO it is a reasonable interpretation to use the _latest_ ("final" if
you will) recipient address.  never mind the fact that the latest RCPT
TO happened across LMTP rather than SMTP.  I think the base spec should
be changed to reflect this more clearly.  I would prefer wording which
allowed Cyrus to work like today, leaving alias knowledge to the MTA.
changing "SMTP" to "SMTP or LMTP" is sufficient for that, but it
probably won't do for Mark.  suggestions?

I'm embarrassed to admit that my reading skills are extremely lacking.
RFC 3028 says, just two paragraphs down from my earlier quote:

   If a protocol other than SMTP is used for message transport,
   implementations are expected to adapt this command appropriately.

On the other hand, "transport" != "delivery" when we talk about email
architecture.  And when an RFC talks about RCPT TO, and transport
commands, well... it reads the way it reads.  Sounds like there's at
least some support for interpreting this as a (possibly munged) final
recipient address, so maybe that's something to think about clarifying
for 3028bis.

People are agreeing; I'm not arguing, honest...