Ned Freed wrote: > Now that NOTARY is at draft, it's probably time to drag RFC > 2034 forward as well. Any objections? No, what does it take, an implementation report ? Almost an erratum for RFC 4408, where it references RFC 3464 it should also reference RFC 3463 and RFC 2034 - the section mentioning 5.7.1 is written from the server's POV. If you need a note about this from someone who claims to know what RFC 4408 is I can do. Maybe fup2 the SMTP list. Frank _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.