Dan Wing writes:
RFC1869 seems to indicate that VRFY is required and thus doesn't need
to be advertised in an EHLO response.
Sorry---I assumed the question was about the real world, not the RFCs.
We will likely drop the proposal anyways in favor of
draft-ietf-fax-mdn-features-01.txt, anyways, but if you're honestly
interested in a justification for draft-ietf-fax-smtp-capabilities I
can give you several.
Yes, I have a morbid interest in the sources of engineering disasters.
---Dan
Smaller, faster, safer than inetd+tcpd. http://pobox.com/~djb/ucspi-tcp.html