Nick Levinson wrote:
I'm puzzled. If you said the logistics are too time-consuming to carry out because providers are unlikely to agree on a guaranteed-to-bounce address, that would make sense and I'd probably drop it.
They're saying providers are unlikely to /implement/ a guaranteed-to-bounce address. In other words: even if you write & submit an RFC (which you can do on your own, without asking ietf@xxxxxxxx first), nobody will follow it.
I think there's a slim chance that some providers might be okay with the idea, so my advice to you would be to go and ask them. Start with real-world implementations at big, influential sites, and design the standard from there.
-- J.D. Falk Return Path Inc http://www.returnpath.net/ _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf