Re: draft-gellens-on-demand-03.txt

["Jeff Stephenson" <jeffstep@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Randall Gellens <Randy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, March 19, 1998 1:12 PM


>At 3:33 PM +0000 3/19/98, Graham Klyne wrote:


<...>

>>Or is it your intention that delivery to an ATRN system will be regarded
as
>>a completed delivery in the same way as delivery to a mailbox server?  In
>>which case, I think that some discussion on the appropriate (and
>>inappropriate) deployments for this scheme would be helpful.
>
>I think it is important that final delivery not occur when the message
>is received by the provider-side.  That's kind of the point; the
>message is still in-transit, and will be relayed using ODMR (and SMTP)
>to the client side, which then delivers it.

Agreed - reception by the provider side should _not_ be considered as
completed delivery.  If some sort of expiration mechanism is implemented on
the provider side that deletes a message in an ODMR queue, it should issue a
DSN for that message; otherwise messages could disappear and nobody would be
the wiser.  It might make sense to emphasize that point in the draft.

-- jeff
.