Thanks Guys for your time.
I'll try to come up with new proposals when I can.
On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 2:21 PM Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan
<giri(_at_)dombox(_dot_)org>
wrote:
You are right. I was worried that receiving server would not recognize
"text/markdown" as a media type since it was registered recently in the
RFC. So if a server started to recognize that as media type, I thought they
should do that via SMTP extension.
But yes, as Gilles Chehade said, it's related to DATA and shouldn't be
there. Even if that's possible, as Mr. Kletnieks said it's gonna break
digital signatures.
Hence, my proposal would not work.
On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 2:12 PM Peter Bowyer <peter(_at_)bowyer(_dot_)org>
wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan
<giri(_at_)dombox(_dot_)org>
wrote:
That's why I'm proposing the MARKDOWN extension. MARKDOWN command
should be presented in the EHLO response only if your server supports
markdown.
What piece of the *server* has to support markdown? The content of the
message isn't the server's business. Nor is knowing what content
type(s) are acceptable to each final destination for each recipient of
each message in a session. That's a matter for the originating MUA and
the receiving MUA to worry about. The server's job is to move the
(mostly) opaque content from one to the other.
PB
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp
--
Best Regards,
Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan
Dombox, Inc.
--
Best Regards,
Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan
Dombox, Inc.
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp