>My problem with it is the same problem I've always had: the
>responsibility should be on the client smtp, not the server. How can
>the client smtp know the server will encode the VERP correctly?
Because it uses ESMTP option negotiation to find out if the server
supports that.
>It would be better to send as many "return paths" as recipient
>addresses, but only one message. This might end up looking like:
>MAIL FROM/RCPT TO:<me-you-returned=example.com><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Can you suggest an application where that would be useful? I use VERP
all the time and I can't ever recall a situation where the default
form of VERP wasn't entirely adequate. Adding features because
someone might want them for some unknown purpose leads to bloatware.
--
John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl,
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail
