On 2/15/2021 4:30 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
> We are going in circles here.
Oh? Sorry. I tried to be simple and clear.
Let me make it even simpler. Please respond to:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/fzCKQu9CyhTcdr1IQ-j43qk8-U8/
It offers revised text and it would help to have people read it and
comment on what problems it causes for use of the draft.
Sorry to have to say it, but the old text was (marginally) better.
The new text says "add at top" but saying nothing about grouping and
prohibiting reordering. Both of which are really important requirements.
By calling it a trace field, you establish the necessary requirements. Yes, the
underlying documents have issues, but they are clear enough. And "trace field"
is a term that most implementors understand.
That said, making the actual requirements explicit would be even better. You
can easily do that by referring to section 4.4 in RFC 5321 and saying that it
all now applies to the combination of Received: and Delivered-to:
I would prefer to do that *and* call Delivered-to: what it is: A trace field.
Ned
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp