John C Klensin wrote:
--On Friday, 13 April, 2007 14:07 -0400 Hector Santos
<hsantos(_at_)santronics(_dot_)com> wrote:
I am not proposing anything else but a "150-" as a PRELIMINARY
reply code for this purpose. No mixing of two or more
different 2xx, 3xx, 4xx, 5xx lines. If the server finds
itself where it needs to "keep the channel" alive, or show it
is still "working" it could issue the PRELIMINARY code 150-
before any other COMPLETION code is finally determined and
issued.
> ..
>
So, ironically, the more strongly you argue that the present
text permits multiline replies with different codes as long as
those codes follow one particular scheme, the stronger the
arguments get for insisting that all continuation lines use the
same code.
Sorry John, I prematurely hit the SEND button when I was going to add
the following. I can easily see how you can come to your summary.
BTW, as I indicated a few times, starting with the very first message in
this thread (as a reply to Frank) I am not proposing any new text
defining usage, nor new functionality as described above as one possible
*implementation* method.
--
HLS