IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Emailcore] Delivered-To issues

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Sat, 02 January 2021 22:27 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: emailcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: emailcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 902403A0EC9 for <emailcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Jan 2021 14:27:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.849
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.849 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=t3b7h5hn; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=l+LpJWG7
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qgPIW4TxDJae for <emailcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Jan 2021 14:27:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE2CB3A0EC4 for <emailcore@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Jan 2021 14:27:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 10189 invoked from network); 2 Jan 2021 22:27:00 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=27cb.5ff0f334.k2101; bh=PuozH0zt6xJurlRdB2hMhunzEnUiP8mOkeLn1Uoqzkg=; b=t3b7h5hnK0rODwY5uGlRIBIDWP3F67uaH4xvxtrmewHbgy+2VnwpLL/PZ3/7ZOKeMK8F49WY7ZRdk3iCgD4Js/pbirEZD5v+Ss8tq1H/CNldBZ+IZEMOVPD91XiqrciiJYMeX/nQ+nOAQXCEfhnv8MXWtqn+mvloRRDJMaDtt/oo+SC5DFs0/gvJOKizEYX7FJ4nHvICgPXZur1+WoY+610cZYY/QrXlp9Sp9lTUevzJzKMT3KOdN4DNjFIj6ICrn2C4WxKAM37BwHwpxpQhfFHprLPtjCDyX8Bps0qXwUs7QjZ/uPY5lufvlLTEx1QVrQZ2mTVFtx/X2Nj8hXpYaA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=27cb.5ff0f334.k2101; bh=PuozH0zt6xJurlRdB2hMhunzEnUiP8mOkeLn1Uoqzkg=; b=l+LpJWG7hRuk4k7IuTBelfCETr3lkgudEzMn/bi39J/WDNOe/uqwkMI3g9CJIh5Xygj7qs65jnqsp0KfwJmskehX1LWbXehTCtljyZPOBnz7pysx++HcA96BpE24CSUa394nVfmct5PRFhOUn9Y8IrEb0xflLQT640wLy8AZz5BxFqj2cYmQ7RAb1iw5MA76SXaJGkLIQjmKhb/JzrI687nPzULg7sdCCCkhw2gg8WE4wtgM8wjxgz0kyfeSlOfyvYD442JRG7XqVMrCmIzzyibhq60X86g8CC+amqSYTuW7K16NAsCm8wuvfaStX1ntQYnpCnNBkZhCjVrY5Pz4fg==
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 02 Jan 2021 22:27:00 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id E290E4A396E1; Sat, 2 Jan 2021 17:26:58 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 2021 17:26:58 -0500
Message-Id: <20210102222659.E290E4A396E1@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: emailcore@ietf.org
Cc: jgh@wizmail.org
In-Reply-To: <f6399eaa-ec58-bfeb-e232-0646df41a979@wizmail.org>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Cleverness: minimal
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emailcore/Scs7KGXwDq4_JsK-6BxWnPE-G2M>
Subject: Re: [Emailcore] Delivered-To issues
X-BeenThere: emailcore@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: EMAILCORE proposed working group list <emailcore.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/emailcore>, <mailto:emailcore-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/emailcore/>
List-Post: <mailto:emailcore@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emailcore-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emailcore>, <mailto:emailcore-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Jan 2021 22:27:04 -0000

In article <f6399eaa-ec58-bfeb-e232-0646df41a979@wizmail.org> you write:
>> Should we be defining both, making it clear that they are
>> different, and then making whatever recommendations seem
>> appropriate about which one (or both) should be provided?
>
>I agree that Envelope-To: and Delivered-To: are different.

Agreed.  What's the difference between Envelope-To and the
FOR clause in a Received header?

>I'm not convinced that this document is the right place
>for either.  I guess there's a benefit in writing down the
>definitions somewhere; the cost is "only" cruft that
>obscures the minimum requirements for implementing an MTA.

I think we have general agreement that if this goes anywhere it's
a different draft, not 5321bis.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email