Jeff, > Indeed. The answer to my concern appears to lie in the subtle but > significant semantic distinction between Relaying and Aliasing, which I I went through quite a number of iterations about aliasing in the email-arch document, based on lots of feedback. It does, indeed, seem to be a challenging function to place into an architecture. > didn't understand before reading your architecture document. Having done > so, I can withdraw my comment on the "resolves to" phrasing, and replace it > with a different one: > > Maybe the spamops document needs a reference to the email-arch document? I'm going to suggest that to the other authors. In fact, the architecture discussion in the spamops document was the motivation (actually the basis text) for the email-arch document. After we did the spamops early drafts, I decided that the community needed something specifically about email architecture. I thought it would be straightforward to write. That was roughly a year and 3 major iterations ago... d/ --- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking +1.408.246.8253 dcrocker a t ... WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf