Re: quick & dirty alternate addresses

"Adam M. Costello" <[email protected]>
> 
> While we're considering new header fields and new address-mapping
> servers to deal with the problem of having alternate addresses, we ought
> to consider how far we could get with what we already have.
...
> From: "name1a <local1a@domain1a> / name1b <local1b@domain1b> /
>   name1c <local1c@domain1c>" <local1a_ACE@domain1a_ACE>

We don't have that. From my point of view, I could implement it, but it
would be roughly as much work as for the Address-Map list.

I'm jittery about two things, though. 1: What effect do really long
display-parts, say 100 characters, have on crapware? 2: What happens when
crapware simply converts to 8-bit and sends that untagged, without
knowing the New Scheme?

Address-Map seems better, since for that method, that the entire header
field may go away, and that's it. As long as the field is present, it
works, if it has been stripped e.g. by some mailing-list software, things
degrade in a comprehensible manner.

--Arnt