Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id MAA24379; Mon, 23 Oct 1995 12:57:00 -0400 Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (bulk_mailer v1.3); Mon, 23 Oct 1995 12:53:02 -0400 Received: from nameserver.utcc.utk.edu by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id MAA24044; Mon, 23 Oct 1995 12:52:47 -0400 Received: from ester.dsv.su.se by nameserver.utcc.utk.edu (4.1/2.8s-UTK.UTCC) id AA05240; Mon, 23 Oct 95 12:49:40 EDT X400-Received: by /PRMD=SUNET/ADMD=_/C=SE/; Relayed; 23 Oct 95 17:44:36+0100 Date: 23 Oct 95 17:44:36+0100 From: "Jacob Palme DSV-SU/KTH" Message-Id: <1163336*jpalme@su-kom.dsv.su.se> References: <199510191019.GAA10161@CS.UTK.EDU> To: ietf-drums Subject: About bounce messages..... Harald wrote: > When we rewrite 822, I would add a sentence that says that when > bouncing a message, the MTA MUST include some indication of the > failing address. Should not bounce messages in the future be according to the new standard for delivery notifications in Internet mail?