At 06:22 07-11-2008, Hector Santos wrote:
In my view, the term "time stamp" should be removed. The
implication is that a "time stamp" header exist and it is an
alternative header to the Received. I'm not aware of a "time stamp"
header. If so, what is its field name?
In Section 126.96.36.199 of RFC 5321, there is:
"When the SMTP server accepts a message either for relaying or for
final delivery, it inserts a trace record (also referred to
interchangeably as a "time stamp line" or "Received" line) at the top
of the mail data."
The "time stamp" header is not an alternative header to the
Received. What the above means is that we might say "time stamp
line" and we might say "Received" line but we are referring to the same thing.
The Received line provides us with the date and time the message was
received. What we are doing is to "time stamp" the message each time
it goes through a relay.
1) Since a Received is a required - period and it
inherently includes a format with a time stamp, there
is no need to mention it in this paragraph.
2) Thus removing the "time stamp" from the parenthetical clause.
There are multiple occurrences of "time stamp" in RFC 5321. The term
can be used interchangeably which is why it's part of the clause
together with Received. That's why it worth a mention.