[Top] [All Lists]

Re: RFC2821bis-01 Issue 3: EHLO parameter

2007-04-01 18:41:08

On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 02:26:24PM -0700, Dave Crocker wrote:

     As folks consider what to do with the text, they should a) make sure 
     it creates no new violence in the document, of course, and b) reflects 
reality by virture of matching existing practise.

In any case, the current text in 2821 is misinterpreted by some (many?)
as a sign that it is not okay to reject on bad hello.

     That's why I suggest completely dropping the text, rather than trying 
     to tweak the normative status.

Dropping the text would mean a change.  I am not against this (far from it).
If the MUST NOT should stay, at least use different wording so that it is
clear to all that the text only forbids one particular case.

2821bis (I've been looking at draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-01) is already 
much better, but I suggest adding a bit of text:

s/address only; s/address only; other rejections are not prohibited! S/

my 2ct

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>