On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 06:34:07AM -0700, Dave Crocker via mailop wrote: > > Folks, > > This was just issued. It will aid in evaluating handling history of a > messsage, especially through aliasing and mailing list sequences. > > d/ > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: RFC 9228 on Delivered-To Email Header Field > Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2022 23:04:21 -0700 (PDT) > From: rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org > To: ietf-annou...@ietf.org, rfc-d...@rfc-editor.org > CC: rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org, drafts-update-...@iana.org > > A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. > > RFC 9228 > > Title: Delivered-To Email Header Field > Author: D. Crocker, Ed. > Status: Experimental > Stream: Independent > Date: April 2022 > Mailbox: dcroc...@bbiw.net > Pages: 10 > Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None > > I-D Tag: draft-crocker-email-deliveredto-10.txt > > URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9228 > > DOI: 10.17487/RFC9228 >
Whilst I understand the Delivered-To: header isn't explicitly codified in an RFC - I don't think there is anything here that we haven't all been using for a *long* time already. Author seems to argue that 'new' use is list explosion and forwarding which is trivially disproven by prior-art. Specifically DJB's draft of 26 years ago: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bernstein-mail-loops-war-00 which explicitly calls out such uses as Dave thinks is new. Sure, ressurect the proposal and push for standards track - but credit needs to go to Dan, not Dave. PG _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
