[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support
From: |
Ralph Corderoy |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support |
Date: |
Wed, 04 Dec 2013 00:33:20 +0000 |
Hi kre,
> > But this behavior is (as far as I can tell) neither endorsed nor
> > prohibited by the RFCs; it's a grey area.
>
> Not grey so much as optional - you're allowed to do it whichever way
> you want, and ideally, the MUA would support both.
Where do the RFCs hint that it is OK to remove the recipients from
"group: a, b, c;"?
Cheers, Ralph.
- [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support, Ken Hornstein, 2013/12/02
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support, Earl Hood, 2013/12/02
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support, Robert Elz, 2013/12/03
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support, Ken Hornstein, 2013/12/03
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support, Robert Elz, 2013/12/03
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support,
Ralph Corderoy <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support, Ken Hornstein, 2013/12/03
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support, Robert Elz, 2013/12/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support, Ken Hornstein, 2013/12/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support, Robert Elz, 2013/12/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support, Robert Elz, 2013/12/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support, Ken Hornstein, 2013/12/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support, Ralph Corderoy, 2013/12/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support, P Vixie, 2013/12/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support, Ken Hornstein, 2013/12/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RFC 5322 group support, Ralph Corderoy, 2013/12/06