Subject: RE: [lemonade] Question 4: should future-delivery be per-recipie nt?

From: "Vaudreuil, Greg M (Greg)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 08:31:35 -0500

I believe we had discussions in NOTARY and decided that it is better to use per-message options.  For most cases, a sender can issue two messages if they want delivery options different for different recipients.  This aligned with evolving best practice of having the sender send multiple nearly identical messages rather than a single per-recipient message when you are interested in different network handling per recipient such as tracking or correlating DSN's with list recipients. 

Same logic would appear to hold here.

Greg V.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On
Behalf Of Greg White
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 12:31 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lemonade] Question 4: should future-delivery be per-recipient?

OK, here's the last question for right now....

Should a user be able to specify different future-xxxx requests for
different recipients of the same message?  That is, move the new HOLD
parm(s) from the MAIL command to the RCPT command?  Or is that just
overkill?

Greg White

_______________________________________________
lemonade mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade

_______________________________________________
lemonade mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade