Re: Missing ABNF terms in 2821bis?

ietf-smtp

2007-10-15 20:15:41




--On Monday, 15 October, 2007 16:32 -0700 Douglas Otis
<dotis(_at_)mail-abuse(_dot_)org> wrote:

John,

Is there a reason for including obsolete definitions for
General-address-literal?


Is there any particularly reason why you think they are obsolete?

 The 2821bis declares dcontent only defined in RFC2822?


I can't parse this sentence sufficiently to figure out what you
are asking

   john

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: email-arch: bounce vs... return?, (continued) Re: email-arch: bounce vs... return?, Jeff Macdonald Re: email-arch: bounce vs... return?, David F. Skoll Re: email-arch: bounce vs... return?, Jeff Macdonald Re: email-arch: bounce vs... return?, Bill McQuillan Re: email-arch: bounce vs... return?, John C Klensin Re: email-arch: bounce vs... return?, Hector Santos Bounce address (was: email-arch: bounce vs... return?), Frank Ellermann Re: Bounce address, Hector Santos Re: Bounce address, Frank Ellermann Missing ABNF terms in 2821bis?, Douglas Otis Re: Missing ABNF terms in 2821bis?, John C Klensin <= Re: Missing ABNF terms in 2821bis?, Douglas Otis Re: Missing ABNF terms in 2821bis?, Peter J. Holzer Re: Missing ABNF terms in 2821bis?, Frank Ellermann Re: Missing ABNF terms in 2821bis?, ned+ietf-smtp Re: Missing ABNF terms in 2821bis?, Frank Ellermann Re: email-arch: bounce vs... return?, Carl S. Gutekunst Re: email-arch: bounce vs... return?, Dave Crocker Re: email-arch: bounce vs... return?, Carl S. Gutekunst Re: email-arch: bounce vs... return?, Dave Crocker Re: email-arch: bounce vs... return?, Hector Santos

Previous by Date:	Missing ABNF terms in 2821bis?, Douglas Otis
Next by Date:	Bounce address (was: email-arch: bounce vs... return?), Frank Ellermann
Previous by Thread:	Missing ABNF terms in 2821bis?, Douglas Otis
Next by Thread:	Re: Missing ABNF terms in 2821bis?, Douglas Otis
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]