Re: Another round of the mailserver URL

>I noticed that the suggestion that clients implementing the mailserver URL put
>a header into generated messages indicating the source of the mailserver
>URL which generated the message didn't make it into the new draft.  This seems
>like an extremely useful feature, not just for identifying the culprits in
>cases where URLs are used to deliver, but also for mailserver administrators
>who may be interested in how people are finding out about them.
>
>Was there a reason that no such suggestion was made?

It was:

>The mail client software may do more than this;
>for example, the client software might check the configured user ID
>using SMTP VRFY before sending a message, or adding other useful
>headers such as "Comments" and "Content-id".

I guess I could be more explicit with suggestions about what should be in
the Comments header.