[enum-wg] ENUM-capable email client?
Florian Weimer fw at deneb.enyo.de
Sun Apr 16 17:12:38 CEST 2006
* John C. Klensin: > We seem to be misunderstanding each other, and I don't why. In > particular, I don't know what you mean by "weak on > local-part-based routing" since any MTA, other than a final > delivery one, that does _any_ routing on the content of the > local part is in clear violation of the SMTP standard. I don't > know if you think an MTA is weak because it follows the standard > or weak because it violates it. RFC 2476 (SMTP Submission) does in fact allow rewriting local-parts. 8-) But I can understand that there are conceptual problems if you do this potentially on each hop. But at the time of message injection -- why not? I can assure that this is the way ENUM-based client-side mail routing will be implemented on UNIX platforms. It belongs into the local MTA, not the MUA. However, I have some doubt whether it's a good idea to promote E.164-based addressing beyond VoIP. For example, if I obtained an ENUM delegation and started hosting a copyright-infringing web site on <http://188.8.131.52.184.108.40.206.220.127.116.11.e164.arpa/>, how would the copyright holder be able to track me down?
[ enum-wg Archives ]