June 29, 2009
10:32 p.m.
Barry Warsaw writes:
On Jun 29, 2009, at 9:47 PM, Grant Taylor wrote:
(Sorry, forgot to include this.)
On 6/29/2009 8:10 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
If it's replying to message with a Precedence: header (and any
value) it's broken.You may want to take a look at section 3.9, "Quality information" of
RFC 2076 (http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2076.txt).Sure, Precedence may be discouraged, but it's pretty common practice.
Amusingly enough, the most recent update of 2076 (see http://people.dsv.su.se/~jpalme/ietf/mail-headers/mail-headers.html) remarks that "more problems with Precedence" were added in its changes documentation. :-)