At 09:38 12-06-2007, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
The 'for' production is incorrect as it stands. "Received: .... for
tony(_at_)att(_dot_)comtony@att.com; ..." is legal according to 2821. Oops.
There are 2-3 ways out of this:
- constrain 'for' to one address
- introduce a separator:
- either FWS
- or "," FWS.
My preference is to constrain it to one address. I cannot remember
seeing production softwaret that inserts multiple addresses on
purpose, so IMO this can be classified as an unused feature and
dropped. (I checked 280k received fields just now and found none.)
The implementations I've seen use the "for" only if there is one
address. Isn't it already constrained to one mailbox?
Regards,
-sm