Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change




Rudy Nedved wrote:

I understand. The assumption is that implementations that work in RFC733/821 world were upgraded to match RFC 2821.

You get credit for even knowing about 733, but please forgive my losing a smallOCD battle:


   733 was for the Arpanet.  Transport was by FTP commands.

   822 was paired with 821 for the Internet.

d/
--

  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: History of fallback to A, (continued) Re: History of fallback to A, John Levine Minor isn't. It's a pardigm change, Dave Crocker Re: Minor isn't. It's a pardigm change, Frank Ellermann Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, John R Levine Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Dave Crocker Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Arnt Gulbrandsen Message not available Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Arnt Gulbrandsen Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Alex van den Bogaerdt Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Frank Ellermann Message not available Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, John R Levine Message not available Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Dave Crocker <= dual-stack IP transition is not specific to SMTP, Dave Crocker Re: dual-stack IP transition is not specific to SMTP, Keith Moore Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, John C Klensin Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Carl S. Gutekunst Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, John C Klensin Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Carl S. Gutekunst Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Mark Andrews Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Frank Ellermann Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, ned+ietf-smtp Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Hector Santos