On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, wayne wrote:
Other fresh I-Ds, note _2821bis_ (the dates are not accurate):
Interesting. I didn't even know it was being worked on. Is this just
to try and get it advanced up the standard track?
As I understand that is primary purpose but some problems and
inconsistances can be expected to be fixed. Here is quote from
the draft:
This draft has been prepared with the main goals of correcting obvious
or reported errors or ambiguous material that appeared in 2821. While
some editorial cleanups have also been applied, cosmetic "matter of
taste" changes have generally been avoided.
Too bad we'll no longer have RFC2821/RFC2822 as mail base in that
order if this goes all by itsef (i.e. RFC4821/RFC2822 does not sound
so neat).
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net