"Chris Haynes" <chris(_at_)harvington(_dot_)org(_dot_)uk> wrote:
Please understand, I'm not inviting a reprise of arguments which have taken
place elsewhere, I'm trying to lift the level of debate to one of process
related to the 'definition' of SMTP.
I'll first just re-state the problem and give it bounds.
That's the best summary I've seen to date. My question now is,
(using the generic "you"):
What do you mean, the "same" message is being forwarded?
How, and from where, would one get an 'authoritative' ruling about
the conformance or non-conformance of forwarding (using the origin's
MAIL FROM with a new RCPT TO) to the extant SMTP architecture?
I would like an answer to that question, too.
.forward files are not required for SMTP to work. Entirely
equivalent functionality can be obtained without using a third parties
name in "MAIL FROM". That functionality requires changes to the sites
using .forward files, and nothing else.
Alan DeKok.