>>> What is "cron?" and how does it interface with the originator defined as
>>> the MSA? is cron an MTA or MUA?
...
> It was a rhetorical question. I don't think its necessary and IMO,
> unprecedented.
I'd be very surprised to find that mention of "cron" in an RFC is
"unprecedented". Maybe I'll download the RFC set, have Google do a
word index on it, and see.
In any case, I think it *is* useful, and should stay.
> In principle, examples are good, but IMO this particular one seems out
> of place.
I think it's not at all out of place, and that it's an excellent
example, because it's frequently used to send automated messages based
on system events and state. Which might be signed, and which
sometimes go to mailing lists.
> author: The agent that provided the content of the message being
> sent through the system. The author delivers that content to the
> originator in order to begin a message's journey to its intended
> final recipients. The author can be a human using an MUA (Mail
> User Agent) or a common system utility such as "cron", etc.
>
> I think what you are essentially saying here is the distinction
> between a Human (UI) Agent and Automated (no UI) Mail Agent. So
> perhaps the last sentence could be restated :
>
> The author can be a human using an MUA (Mail User Agent) or
> an automated mail robot with an MTA.
I don't see that "automated mail robot with an MTA" is right at all.
But I see what you're getting at, and I'd support a change such as
this:
The author can be a human using an MUA (Mail User Agent) or
an automated process that may send mail (for example, the "cron"
Unix system utility).
Barry
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf