Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
That said, the WG may choose not to solve that use case.
I am afraid that's the only sensible way, but the vacation extension
should probably document this in section 6, security considerations.
Like:
If mail is forwarded from a site that uses subaddressing, it may
be impossible to list all recipient addresses with ":addresses".
Seems reasonable. I'll add it unless someone objects.
This seems fine. Is "subaddressing" a well-defined term?
Yes, see draft-ietf-sieve-rfc3598bis-01.txt