Subject: Re: [yam] #6: RFC 5321 Section 4.4: remove typo

From: "yam issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 00:07:46 -0000

#6: RFC 5321 Section 4.4: remove typo
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------
 Reporter:  sm+ietf@…                    |       Owner:     
     Type:  defect                       |      Status:  new
 Priority:  major                        |   Milestone:     
Component:  5321bis-smtp-pre-evaluation  |     Version:     
 Severity:  -                            |    Keywords:     
-----------------------------------------+----------------------------------

Comment(by sm+ietf@…):

 Comment about RFC 5321 posted by Ned Freed on 6 Dec 2009

 As long as we're messing with 4.4, perhaps we should also consider getting
 rid
 of the false binary choice it offers (MUST send a single DSN for all
 recipients
 or one DSN per recipient). There's nothing inherently wrong with sending,
 say,
 one DSN for one recipient and a second for all the others. And this
 happens
 all the time in practice when delivery problems are discovered at
 different
 processing stages.

 So I suggest changing:

   A single notification listing all of the failed recipients or
   separate notification messages MUST be sent for each failed
   recipient.  For economy of processing by the sender, the former
   SHOULD be used when possible.  Note that the key difference between
   handling aliases (Section 3.9.1) and forwarding (this subsection) is
   the change to the backward-pointing address in this case.  All
   notification messages about undeliverable mail MUST be sent using the
   MAIL command (even if they result from processing the obsolete SEND,
   SOML, or SAML commands) and MUST use a null return path as discussed
   in Section 3.6.

 to something like:

   Notifications MUST be sent detailing all failed recipients. For economy
   of processing by the sender, a single notification listing all of the
   failed recipients SHOULD be used when possible. All
   notification messages about undeliverable mail MUST be sent using the
   MAIL command (even if they result from processing the obsolete SEND,
   SOML, or SAML commands) and MUST use a null return path as discussed
   in Section 3.6.

 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/yam/current/msg00238.html

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/yam/trac/ticket/6#comment:1>
yam <http://tools.ietf.org/yam/>