# Re: Another round of the mailserver URL

Paul Hoffman (ietf-lists@proper.com)
Sat, 8 Jul 1995 09:14:31 -0700

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Keith Moore: "alternate URL for URNs considered harmful"
- Previous message: Keith Moore: "Location-independent URLs /or/ URNs considered harmful"
- Maybe in reply to: Paul Hoffman: "Another round of the mailserver URL"

    Message-Id: <v02120c11ac245c2d1d48@[165.227.40.14]>

    Date: Sat, 8 Jul 1995 09:14:31 -0700

    To: dupuy@smarts.com (Alexander Dupuy)

    From: ietf-lists@proper.com (Paul Hoffman)

    Subject: Re: Another round of the mailserver URL

>I noticed that the suggestion that clients implementing the mailserver URL put
>a header into generated messages indicating the source of the mailserver
>URL which generated the message didn't make it into the new draft. This seems
>like an extremely useful feature, not just for identifying the culprits in
>cases where URLs are used to deliver, but also for mailserver administrators
>who may be interested in how people are finding out about them.
>
>Was there a reason that no such suggestion was made?

It was:

>The mail client software may do more than this;
>for example, the client software might check the configured user ID
>using SMTP VRFY before sending a message, or adding other useful
>headers such as "Comments" and "Content-id".

I guess I could be more explicit with suggestions about what should be in
the Comments header.

- Next message: Keith Moore: "alternate URL for URNs considered harmful"
- Previous message: Keith Moore: "Location-independent URLs /or/ URNs considered harmful"
- Maybe in reply to: Paul Hoffman: "Another round of the mailserver URL"