[Top] [All Lists]

RE: RFC3463, 450 reply codes, and 4.7.1 extended codes.

2005-05-09 10:16:48

On Mon May 9 2005 11:15, Vaudreuil, Greg M (Greg) wrote:

The author never anticipated a situation where a sender may be not authorized 
at one time but could be authorized at another.  At the most basic level, 
that seems like the definition of an unreliable system. 

Fortunately, imagination does not limit reality.  And UBE certianly 
challenges the reality of the email architecture.  I have no problem 
supporting an RFC errata note indicating that this seamingly incorrect 
prognistication be eliminated.   

In more broad terms, I like opinions as to whether these predictions of 
utility have any value, or whether they should be deleted from a future 

Greg V.

IMO, 3463 is fine as it stands.  Temporary failures of the sort
discussed could be indicated via 4.7.0, which is specifically
provided for cases where "the problem cannot be well expressed
with any of the other provided detail codes".