[Top] [All Lists]

Re: rfc2821bis-01 Issue 14 Continuation of 222 greeting and Issue 15 syntax for multiline replies

2007-04-08 12:57:13

Thanks John for your patience.

At this point, I should probably excuse myself from this documentation detail process.

One closing point regarding multi-line responses and consequential synergistic events:

-  With the advent of faster processing machines, growing,
   advanced/extended state processing, i.e,  AVS filtering,
   OPES, SHIMS, at the DATA state,

-  5 mins timeout recommendation,

-  Method for preventing client time-outs.

Not sure if it warrants a comment, just wanted to instill this neuron for future consideration.

Thanks again for your patience.


John C Klensin wrote:

--On Saturday, April 07, 2007 6:54 PM -0400 Hector Santos <hsantos(_at_)santronics(_dot_)com> wrote:

John C Klensin wrote:

--On Friday, 06 April, 2007 23:39 -0400 Tony Hansen
<tony(_at_)att(_dot_)com> wrote:

I've also seen multi-line greetings from various servers for
several years now.

I think the trend to use multi-line greeting was begun as an
anti-zombie tactic, and the valid clients were quickly fixed.

Unless someone wants to argue this the other way, I consider
this item to be closed.  The text has been changed in the
working draft.

I'm confused. Please correct me.

Are you saying that you have included a statement in the new
text that suggest implementations intentionally use MULTI-LINE
welcomes in order to trap bad guys?

No. I am saying only that I have changed the _syntax_ for the 220 greeting to permit a multiline greeting, something that 2821 formally did not permit.

The draft makes no comment at all about why would would want to generate such a greeting (or not).