Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-msgtrk-trkstat-01.txt

--On Thursday, April 5, 2001 17:21 -0700 Eric Allman 
<[email protected]> wrote:
> This wording was taken nearly as is from 1894, and the intent was to
> keep things fairly parallel to that spec.  I'm open to suggestions.
> Anyone?

My suggestion is to use "expanded" for _all_ cases where there are multiple 
recipients.  If a user sends to a list and gets a "delivered" notification, 
their assumption will be that the message has been delivered to all list 
recipients.  So any use of "delivered" with a multiple recipients is likely 
to result in a "user astonishment" scenario.  Since those are bad, stick to 
"expanded".

The only caveat would be if a site has a local alias sent to multiple 
recipients, and wishes to conceal the fact the address is a list.  Then 
"delivered" would be OK.

> Already dealt with, as indicated in my previous message.  Do you still
> think a cross-reference is warranted?

A non-normative cross-reference would be nice.  When I'm considering only 
the security implications of a protocol, I look only at the security 
considerations and anything it references.  But the text you added is good 
enough.

		- Chris