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

--On Monday, June 18, 2001 20:18 -0700 Eric Allman 
<[email protected]> wrote:
> The problem with using "expanded" for all cases where there are
> multiple recipients is that the MTA doesn't necessarily know.  For
> example, if the MTA can deliver to a program on behalf of a user,
> that program might explode a mailing list.  I believe you see this
> in Postfix, and for that matter some message stores (including, I
> believe, Exchange) have the property that the MTA delivers to a
> real mailbox which is then scanned later by a background process
> that does the exploding.

I'm all for accepting reality.  So I'd say that both "delivered" and 
"expanded" are valid for any multi-recipient scenario, although the latter 
should be preferred since it makes it clearer to the notification recipient 
what happened.  It's fine to have overlapping meanings like this, but it 
needs to be explicit to avoid confusion.

		- Chris