Re: homework, not an experiment, draft-crocker-email-deliveredto
Ned Freed <[email protected]> Sat, 07 Aug 2021 06:51:10 -0700 (PDT)
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.smtp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> Following the discussion, I see that the delivery-to is currently used > (in many cases) to loop detection. > In such cases it could contain an email address, a token, etc.. > I suspect that at the top of the problems discussed here there is a > conflict in the header name (deliverd-to:), between the current use > and the draft. > I would say that "delivered-to:" is not the best name for the current > use (loop detection), but... it is there. And surprisingly difficult to change. Although this type of loop detection is inherently a local MTA matter, large deployments routinely have lots of separate MTAs operating in parallel providing a particular service. Even if you assume that the all the MTAs use the same software - and there situations where that's not the case - you can't upgrade large numbers of MTAs simultaneously. Of course you can argue that this is a minor feature and it won't matter if it's broken for the duration of an upgrade. But IME the folks whose approval you need tend not to be very sympathetic to such arguments - understandable given the costs of failed upgrades and rollbacks. What this means is that implementations will have to support both names for a considerable period of time. That's considerably more expensive than switching the value of a single constant. Ned