Re: sieve draft

[Tomas Fasth <tomas.fasth@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bart Schaefer wrote:

> Hmm; having written that, I see that as presently written the sieve draft
> assumes that the message has already been "accepted" and that the bounce
> action merely resends it via a DSN.  In that case I agree that "bouncing"
> the message is much less interesting as a separate action.  However, I'm
> not convinced that there aren't valid reasons to want to use a DSN rather
> than an MDN to describe what has occurred.

My opinion is that once the message have been delivered, sending a
DSN would not make sense anymore. Not the least since communication
beyond the point of delivery should be regarded as end-to-end,
between end-users (or their agents). From that perspective, using
MDN seem more appropriate if you want to do any "out-of-band"
communication to the other end.

-- 
Hälsningar/Regards

Tomas Fasth <tomas.fasth@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
tel: +46-13-218-181 cel: +46-708-870-957 fax: +46-708-870-258
TwinSpot is a subsidiary of EuroNetics Operation in Sweden