[Top] [All Lists]

RFC 1123bis?

2009-02-01 15:40:16

Tony Finch wrote:

If so, should this be stated in the revised text?

Not in 3207 - this requirement is inherited from 5321.

On a related, we desperately need another RFC 1123, the "holy bible" for Internet hosting as I called it. :-)

Something that puts it all together again. I just find it funny how we can be at times so anal about the whys things are done, with partial references and presumptions of inherit understanding, yet, we end up revisiting, rewriting things when something occurs people worked hard to prevent. I carry a favorite motto from my old High School English teacher, "Being specific is Terrific." It has helped in all my writings, technical or otherwise.

Today, with SMTP and all the augmented extensions, etc, a consolidated technical summary guide is necessary. Not everyone is as keen as others where they know every RFC nook and cranny, every twist and turn issues related to the email system.

Of course, the question can be asked, should a SMTP implementor, new or otherwise, but especially new, be aware of all encompassing details, every RFC, etc, related to SMTP before he even attempts to write a server or client? Can 5321 alone do the job for a minimum design of standard server or client?


Hector Santos, CTO

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