moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu (Keith Moore) wrote on 03.04.01 in
but for the purpose of this discussion I don't think it matters whether
the message store is part of the UA or part of the MTS - in either case
you want vacation notices to go to the same place as other kinds of
notifications (DSNs and automatically-generated MDNs)
There's actually a rather simple argument why vacation messages should go
to the envelope address.
It is the exact same argument that applies to *all* automatically
generated reports about generic mail (that is, when you know more about
the mail then you may be able to do something else, but if all you know is
that it is a piece of mail then you MUST use the envelope address).
Consider this case:
I get a piece of mail from a customer. I think that my collegue (who is
currently on vacation) should see this mail, so I forward it. Who should
get the vacation notification?
Well, quite obviously, I should get it. The customer would have no idea
why he got that mail, and if I didn't get it, I might expect the collegue
to do something about it which obviously he can't right now, which is
exactly what the vacation message is designed to prevent.
But depending on the mechanism my MUA uses for forwarding, I might be in
From:, or in Resent-From:, or nowhere except in the Return-Path:. But it
is pretty certain that I *will* be in the Return-Path:.
And if you think about it, the logic that makes me the correct recipient
here is actually the exact same logic that makes me the correct recipient
for nondelivery notifications, which is *THE* traditional use for the
I caused the delivery attempt, I should receive the notification. Not