Re (2): [Oberon] another fault involving SMTP?

Jörg Straube joerg.straube at
Thu Oct 21 21:31:31 MEST 2010


>> "Bcc" is a can of worms ...
> Why do you say that?  Appendix B, paragraph 1. is clear enough; 
> the bcc addresses should be removed from the header.

RFC5321 is "rather" new (2008). There are quite a few MTA
and MUA implementations out there, and not all follow those
newest recommendations. The older RFC821 (1982) and RFC2821
(2001) were not as precise as this newest RFC.
Sometimes implementors tried to code around the issues of the
older RFCs by inventing own (incompatible) rules ending in the
fact that Bcc is still in the mail header at the receiving side.


More information about the Oberon mailing list