On Mon, 05 Apr 2021 21:31:16 -0400 Stefan Monnier <monn...@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
> > I use some GMX accounts, and they apparently don't support plus > > addressing (I just tried, and the message was refused with "550 > > Requested action not taken: mailbox unavailable."). I suppose it would be > > nice if they did support it, but I can't really fault them for not > > supporting a non-standard Google invention. > > It predates Google by a long shot. > It was a fairly standard config option back in the days of sendmail+procmail. Thanks for the correction. I just haven't been able to figure out how much of a "standard" it actually is. Some RFCs (e.g., https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5233) acknowledge it as existing ("On email systems that allow for 'subaddressing' or 'detailed addressing' (e.g., "ken+si...@example.org") ..."), but it doesn't seem to be a formal standard. Celejar
