Is having a SEND command on what is essentially a storage server/protocol a good idea?

The following is a list of possible issues I've been pondering.

• What constitutes a successful delivery?
  • If a message is sent to two email addresses, and only one is successfully delivered, is that success or failure?
  • If a message is successfully delivered to only one of two email addresses, how is the failure portion reported?
  • What should the timeout be for a BikINI server to keep trying to deliver?
• What constitutes failure?
• How do we determine what is allowed as the envelope sender/recipient?

As long as the message is handed over to an MTA for delivery, delivery load is taken off of the BikINI server, but I'm not sure it is a good idea to include the added complexity of a message sending mechanism in the BikINI protocol. It really seems like this is duplicating SMTP functionality which is not necessarily a good thing.

Send is a good idea, but the definition must be specific about what success and failure mean: Success means the message was successfully handed to an agent for delivery (the agent accepted receipt). Failure means the message was not successfully handed to an agent for delivery (for whatever reason). Make these changes in the definition of SEND, then this will be done. - dave

If determining valid sender/recipient values is something which should be addressed, then that needs to happen in a different issue. - dave

Issue done.