[Asrg] Re: draft-hall-inline-dsn-01

[Claus Assmann <ca+asrg at esmtp.org>]

On Tue, Jan 30, 2007, Eric A. Hall wrote:

> I would imagine that ietf-smtp at imc.org is the right place to talk about

If the current participants of this thread agree, we can move the
discussion over there.

> deferred-rcpt-responses would be most descriptive but that's a bit greedy
> given that command-line space is fixed. I don't really care what people
> call it. Robots will be the 99.9999% use case and they won't care either.
> Probably some kind of acronym like DRR or whatever would be most efficient
> as far as that goes.

"DRR" is fine, currently I call it "RSAD" in my implementation, but
that's trivial to change.

> I changed the section 6 heading in the current draft. The additional
> breakdown looks reasonable and appropriate so I'll do that in the next
> edition if there's any real interest in pursuing this further.

I'm interested. I'm currently implementing it in my MTA, and I can
implement it in the (still?) most widely used MTA if we get this
to an RFC.

Please make also the change to require PIPELINING, as LMTP does:

5.  Implementation requirements

   A server implementation MUST implement the PIPELINING [PIPELINING]
   and ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES [ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES] ESMTP extensions.


_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg