SM wrote:
Your forwarding recipe prescribes that a DSN must follow the reverse of the path of the original message.
I don't think so. It _may_ do that, or it may just drop any DSN requirement for privacy considerations, or use ORCPT. It should depend on users preferences.
It prevents having asynchronous paths which are quite common in communication networks.
I wouldn't like that. Actually, if a forwarding agreement were set up between a secondary MX and its higher priority servers, for each recipient, that would imply building a copy of the users database. Something that backup MXes ordinarily don't do.
That forwarding fix reminds me of source routing.
Yes, while rfc 1123 solved the sending issue, it broke the reverse path. However, except for the case of backup MXes (that I haven't yet worked out well), forwarding implies altering the recipient address.
_______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg at irtf.org https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg