Bruce Lilly wrote:
Specifically, what is "local time" if a (human) message composer is
sitting in an airplane composing a message via a telnet link to a
(ground-based) host computer which will then send the message via a
separate, remote submission server?
Let the human message composer figure it out, the prose allows them
to pick whatever they consider as "local".
By the way, the airplane is crossing over the (North) polar ice cap
as the composer travels an intercontinental great circle route to
his destination.
Amusing, but no problem for 2822upd. Let them compose messages from
a future lunar base, they can pick UTC. Maybe 2822upd could drop the
SHOULD (?)
unlimited w.r.t. the number of optional-fields as specified in
section 3.6. Specifically, does it mean that the specification for
extension fields is not allowed to specify a maximum (or minimum,
for that matter) field count for extension fields?
IMO clear, an agent not knowing the optional field is supposed to
accept "one or more". The specification can say what it wishes.
For today I pass on the notorious "sender", somehow I managed to
buy coffee without caffeine :-(
Frank