🚀 go-pugleaf

From article <438@ladcgw.ladc.bull.com>, by frank@ladc.bull.com (Frank Mayhar):
> Here's an idea:  Have the UA inform the MTA that Message-ID such-and-such,
> located in file x, needs a Return-view-to processed.  The MTA then looks in
> the indicated file for that message-id, and if it's there, it generates
> the return and marks the message accordingly.
> 
> So the UA simply informs the MTA when a particular message has been read
> (and contains a return-view-to header), and the MTA actually does the work.
> What are the problems with this?  Any?

I like the idea of this, it does seem to be a step in the right direction
hever there are some big holes in it to be resolved.

1) How to communicate thi sfrom the MUA to the MTA in a know manner.

2) How to track multiple views of the same file I.E. the save it then read it
then read the saved version problem.

The original question came about because SCO OP mailer has view receipts,
however I would be very interested to hear what the X.400 standards have
in the way or receipts.

> -- 
> Frank Mayhar  ..!uunet!ladcgw!frank (frank@ladc.bull.com)
>               Bull HN Los Angeles Development Center
>               5250 W. Century Blvd., LA, CA  90045  Phone:  (213) 216-6241
-- 
John Pettitt, Specialix, Giggs Hill Rd, Thames Ditton, Surrey, U.K., KT7 0TR
{backbone}!ukc!slxsys!jpp    jpp%slxinc@uunet.uu.net     jpp@specialix.co.uk
Tel: +44-1-941-2564       Fax: +44-1-941-4098         Telex: 918110 SPECIX G
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<