At 15:11 -0800 on 02/28/2012, Ned Freed wrote about Re: "proper"
handling of BCC:
> Ways it can be handled is for the MUA to submit the BCC header to the
MSA and have it remove the header while cloning the message to create
one master and one copy for each BCC listing only the Address, have
the MSA scan the To and CC assuming that any RCPT-TOs not there are
BCCs and do the cloning, OR add a BCC indicator to the RCPT-TO and do
the cloning. Not that the first 2 alter the MSA while the last alters
both the MSA and MUA.
It's certainly possible to have the MSA make the message copy, but we'd
need to define an extension for that. No such extension exists AFAIK.
No extension needed. So long as the MSA has the code to clone (and
inject the BCC into) a submitted message that has more RECPT-TOs than
the sum of the addresses in TO and CC (ie: So long as it is not being
submitted by a Mailing List and thus had one or more BCC'ed addresses
that only the MUA knew of) you just need to make this the default via
a parm setting (This functioning is method 2 of 3 above). This is
similar to having a MSA or MTA clone multi-addressed messages that
would normally be sent a one message with multiple RECPT-TOs going to
the same MTA by having a "DO NOT BATCH" parm. Since this is a setting
in the MSA/MTA code it just defines a default action not one that
only occurs when requested by the submitter. I acknowledge that an
extension would be better so it only occurs when the users asks.
OTOH: One way to handle this is to define two MSA addresses - One
that works as now and one with this default action code. If you want
this to occur then just use a sending persona that points at the 2nd