Philip Hazel wrote:
> The Bcc Issue: posted to the exim-users, exim-dev, and ietf-822 mailing
> lists
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> The issue of who handles Bcc: header lines has again been raised, and I
> am seeking opinions as widely as I can. The requirement is
> straightforward: non-Bcc recipients of a message should not see the
> addresses of any Bcc recipients, that is, their copies of the message
> should not contain Bcc: header lines.
I can't actually see much use for the bcc: header line.
That is, I think a transmitting MUA should accept a bcc: directive
(but not create a bcc: header, only an envelope rcpt to).
A receiving MUA could infer a BCC, I suppose (but I don't really care).
I don't think an MTA should be required to note a bcc: header in
any way. It might be a nicety, for dealing with broken MUAs (mutt?),
to provide the option of stripping it - but no cleverness needed.
Cheers,
Jeremy
