At 10:56 AM -0800 11/13/03, ned(_dot_)freed(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com wrote:
Messing with the syntax is a really bad idea IMO. I understand that there
is some discomfort in embedding information in tokens like this, but
it has the feature that it beats the alternatives.
I might feel differently if I felt this was going to turn into a completely
open-ended thing. But I see little chance of our adding additional
orthogonal security facilities to SMTP in the future. What you see is all
That's really the key: are there going to be more in the future? I
can't see any, but who knows? Probably the right answer is to add
SMTPAUTH and STARTTLS as in Chris' draft, and if at some point in the
future we need to add a new orthogonal one, make a syntax change then.
Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly-selected tag: ---------------
Good news. Ten weeks from Friday will be a pretty good day.