On 4 Feb 2021, at 17:46, John Levine wrote:
In article <ac72f2cc-7244-23d1-3615-a8f4e5f7388c(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net> you
write:
This draft was prompted by discussion in the emailcore wg, but is
outside the scope of the wg charter. So the spec is being pursued as
AD-sponsored.
This short draft fills in a long standing gap in the specs. MTAs have
been
adding Delivered-To headers for over 20 years but the header has never
been
registered with IANA and there's never been a spec saying what it
does.
Documenting an existing header field is always a good thing, but a
couple of questions:
Is there any functional or semantic difference between an MDA adding
Delivered-To: and an MDA adding a Received: with a 'for' clause
containing the same address? Is it somehow conveying the semantic
difference between an MTA and an MDA? It seems like Received: could have
been used, and it can carry more info. (And perhaps the right question
to ask before all that is: Why did folks start adding a Delivered-To:
instead of just adding a Received: field with a 'for' clause?)
Also, does adding the Return-Path: happen before or after adding the
Delivered-To:? The spec seems to indicate before, but it doesn't mention
Return-Path: at all.
pr
--
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp