[Top] [All Lists]

Re: email-arch: bounce vs... return?

2007-10-17 15:20:43

Hi Dave,
At 12:48 13-10-2007, Dave Crocker wrote:
In the Internet Mail Architecture draft:


There terms "Bounce Handler" and "Bounce address" are used. As the document notes, the terms are not the nicest, but they seem to be the most prevalent.

(Earlier drafts attempted to use the term "Notices" but this gained to traction.)

There has been some community input suggesting that "Return [Path] address" and "Return Handler" would be better choices.

The Return-path is a header with an address which is the reverse-path. Reverse-path is better than "Bounce handling address". I prefer "Return-path Handler" over "Return Handler" as people may be able to relate to what they see in a message.

Bounce unfortunately has a negative connotation given the reject versus bounce debate.