Re: Internet draft for VERP

Chris Garrigues ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: > From:  Mark Delany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: > At 05:54 PM Friday 7/30/99, Chris Garrigues wrote:
: > >One way to think about it is as defining a "network standard conf-break
: > >character" which systems are expected to convert to and from in order to

: > Yep. A standard conf-break may not be a bad idea, but it doesn't avoid the

: I wonder if it might actuall be better to make the network standard conf-break be 
: different than qmail's to make it clear that a conversion needs to occur.

Doesn't this sound very qmail-centric for an internet standard?
The partitioning issue was raised, now conf-break.  It's not a
huge leap to letting the sender specify whatever arbitrary string
he wants for a return path.

-harold