--On Wednesday, 27 June, 2001 08:41 +0100 Julian Onions
OK - so would expanding the security section help? I don't
want to be prescriptive, as there are a lot of different cases
that might make sense. But a discussion on what an implementor
might want to consider for various possible cases could be
included there. Is that the sort of thing you are after?
If so - I'll draft some text and send it out.
This is certainly necessary. Whether it is sufficient is
Ummm - I think you lost me here... I'm not sure what you are
asking or suggesting. The extension is meant to be used on a
hop by hop basis, and should be used regardless of what the
hop type is. Is there some similar extension that does this
that I could refer to. In my mind, this draft shares a lot of
common ground with the SIZE extension.
The difference is that, with SIZE, the authority of each
receiving MTA to determine what it will accept is unquestioned.
As Keith indicates, authorization for changing priorities, or
changing intermediate handling based on them, is not obvious.