Re: Last Call: draft-saintandre-jabberid (The Jabber-ID Header Field) to Proposed Standard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



SM wrote:
> At 09:54 24-08-2007, Lisa Dusseault wrote:
>> FYI on this last call document relating to email header fields. 
>> Please note that some review on the Apps-review team list has already
>> suggested this go to Experimental instead
>> (<http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-review/current/msg00062.html>http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-review/current/msg00062.html
>> ).
> 
> To avoid any ambiguity, between From and Sender, I suggest renaming the
> Examples section to Implementation and adding:
> 
>    The Jabber Identifier is associated with the author of the message;
> see [MESSAGE].
>    If the "From:" header field contains more than one mailbox, the
> Jabber-ID header
>    should not be added to the message.  There should be no more than one
> instance
>    of the Jabber-ID header.

That seems reasonable and I have incorporated it into my working
version. Thanks for the text.

> I preferred not to suggest associating the header with the Sender:
> header field as that field may be added at a later stage, for example,
> when the message is sent to a mailing list.  We could get around that by
> adding a Sender: field on transmission but then it would go against RFC
> 2822 Section 3.6.2.

Hmm, yes, I think it would be best to avoid making that association.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]