That's added by the outgoing smtp server, but it didn't receive the message
"with" SMTP. Unfortunately, we can't just say "with gRPC" since the with
value has to be IANA registered. I guess we could make it an X-Received
header instead, or just add the from clause. That said, we also use "with
HTTP" and no one has complained about those, so maybe... OTOH, I was once
told to use "with UTF8" to know that a message was RFC 6532 instead of RFC
5322, so that wouldn't be very helpful unless we also had a 'with gRPCUTF8'
First, why do you need to say "with" anything? The "with" clause is optional in
both RFC 5321 and RFC 5322.
Seems to me that it's a hell of a lot better to omit an optional clause than
to include with with a bogus value.
And if you want to nitpick this, there's a loophole in RFC 5321 in regards to
with clauses. In regards to additional protocol fields, it says:
Attdl-Protocol = Atom
; Additional standard names for protocols are
; registered with the Internet Assigned Numbers
; Authority (IANA) in the "mail parameters"
; registry [9]. SMTP servers SHOULD NOT
; use unregistered names.
SMTP servers aren't supposed to use unregistered, but this says nothing
about other kinds of servers. So you actually can use "with gRPC" if you
really want to.
Ned
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp