[Top] [All Lists]

Re: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-09

2008-03-21 10:18:17

John C Klensin wrote:
After a review by Tony of the comments from the second Last
Call, I've prepared a clean copy of the document for IESG
consideration.  It is in the process of being posted.  I hope
Tony will post a summary of the changes that have been made (and
not made) but, until he has time to do that, I would encourage
checking the "Change Log" appendix and/or doing a diff against

The changes are pretty much all fine-tuning or editorial, IMO.

<pseudo-chair hat on>

To see a diff, click on Diff1 or Diff2 links from

Here are the issues that were raised right around or since last call on -08 went out and not previously resolved.

Section 2.1, para 6>> There's too many "either"s and other possible rewrites...

Resolution>>      Concur, too many either's, but other rewrites not necessary.

Section 3.1-3>>   Issues with wording around "transaction".

Resolution>>      Concur, change "transaction" to "mail session".

Section 3.3-8+ and Section 4.1.4-9>> Suggest replacing "If a ... command appears" with "transaction" and add definition section for transaction.

Resolution>> No, text is adequate as is. Adding a definition section on "transaction" is possible for 2821ter.

Section 3.5.2-1>> wording about VRFY/EXPN normal responses

Resolution>>      Concur with posted suggested clarification

Section 4.1.4-9>> need ref to EHLO as way to abort command

Resolution>>      Concur with posted suggested clarification

Section 4.2-5>>   Discussion of Greeting response upon connection

Resolution>>      add a statement to end of paragraph discussing Greeting

   (Other server responses upon connection follow the syntax of

Section 4.3.2>>           DATA missing E: 503, 554

Resolution>>      Concur

Appendix B-2>>    bad reference [32]

Resolution>>      Corrected here and section 2.3.7.

Appendix D.4>>    Why use SEND FROM?

Resolution>>      change SEND FROM to MAIL FROM

Other points raised with respect to some minor differences between 2821bis's ABNF and 2822upd's corresponding ABNF should be re-raised during the last call for 2822upd (coming soon).

</pseudo-chair hat off>

        Tony Hansen

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