At 04:16 PM 7/3/2002 -0400, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote: >This "one address per copy" approach insures that there will ALMOST >ALWAYS be wasted processing and message uploading in any situation >where knowing the capabilities prior to message transmission would >have allowed the piggybacking of additional addresses onto a copy of >the message
If the sender already know the capabilities of the recipient, then the sender does not need to use ESMTP/CONNEG. ESMTP/CONNEG is designed for use when the sender does NOT have that information. There are a number of ways the sender might obtain capabilities before starting this SMTP session. One example is <http://www.imc.org/draft-ietf-fax-content-negotiation>. Another is, no doubt, via some LDAP-based directory. >You need to decide what the >trade-offs are By "you" I assume you mean the aggregation of the implementer and the sending system's administrator. There is no need for this specification to dictate that choice. d/ ---------- Dave Crocker <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com> tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850
