Re: Discussion about draft-benecke-cfbl-address-header

... saw that i've sent the reply just to Ale.

Thanks for the explanation. I'm going to cite RFC 6590 with the next
revision.

Am 22.01.22 um 13:06 schrieb Alessandro Vesely:
> On Thu 20/Jan/2022 13:42:43 +0100 Jan-Philipp Benecke wrote:
>> Am 19.01.22 um 19:52 schrieb Alessandro Vesely:
>>
>>> The practice to redact information could be mentioned.
>> Could you give me a little more detail on what you expect here?
>> Do you mean the general existing practice to redact information?
>
>
> J.D. Falk recommends to redact the recipient email address throughout
> RFC 6449.  Since you cite that, you could as well cite RFC 6590.
>
>
>>> Why shouldn't messages automatically filtered to the Junk folder be
>>> reported? Isn't it interesting?
>>
>> Good point, the information about automatic filtering is of course
>> interesting as well.
>> The more i think about it, the more i think that this decision should be
>> made by the mailbox provider and not by the I-D.
>
>
> The I-D can provide a means to express that decision.
>
>
> Best
> Ale

_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp