On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 23:10:36 -0700 Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Explain what validates said non-issues?
Uhm, no. I have explained them already. The onus is on you to explain
why they are nothing more than paranoid and not valid concerns and problems.
> And what business does a client have speaking an inter-server protocol?
Care to back that up with a cite? Here lemme help.
RFC2822:
Although SMTP was designed as a mail transport and delivery protocol,
this specification also contains information that is important to its
use as a 'mail submission' protocol, as recommended for POP [3, 26]
and IMAP [6]. Additional submission issues are discussed in RFC 2476
[15].
RFC2476:
However, SMTP is now also widely used as a message *submission*
protocol, that is, a means for message user agents (MUAs) to
introduce new messages into the MTA routing network. The process
which accepts message submissions from MUAs is termed a Message
Submission Agent (MSA).
Note the use of past and present tense in regards to the role of SMTP.
When the relevant RFCs acknowledge that use what leg do you have to stand on?
Are you about to claim the RFCs are wrong and should be ignored. If so may I
ask whom gets to choose which RFCs are correct, which are not and when to
adhere and ignore?
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
| -- Lenny Nero - Strange Days
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
