Unhelpful behavior of many MUAs...
Bruce Lilly <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.rfc822 |
|---|---|
| Organization | Bruce Lilly |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue June 7 2005 10:27, Paul Jakma wrote: > 1. Unhelpful behaviour of many MUAs in presence of Reply-To > Would it be an idea to start by solving 1 first? Eg via a BCP or some > other document? You could try. I suspect an intended status of BCP would run into difficulties, including: o IETF usually doesn't attempt to regulate implementation issues which do not have serious interoperability issues. It would be at best difficult to word things carefully to fit within what is usually considered suitable for BCP. o good luck achieving consensus, particularly if you are right that *many* MUAs are currently doing something unsuitable On the other hand, an Informational document describing the facts and their consequences, but stopping short of recommending implementation design changes should go through the process without more than the usual trouble. You're of course welcome to write an Internet-Draft that makes implementation recommendations, but that's much more likely to get caught on one or more ratholes.