up our own
standards (evil grin)
We'd just need a catchy name for it..
--JT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 4/25/01, 4:08:13 PM, "Chris Garrigues"
<[E
> From: Mike Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 01:49:24 +0300
>
> Matthew Patterson wrote:
> >
> > I'm not very good at reading RFCs, so I can't be sure myself. Can anyone
> > confirm that qmail 1.3 with the BigDNS and queuevar patches will be
> > compliant with whatever stan
Matthew Patterson wrote:
>
> I'm not very good at reading RFCs, so I can't be sure myself. Can anyone
> confirm that qmail 1.3 with the BigDNS and queuevar patches will be
> compliant with whatever standards may come out of RFCs 2821 and 2822?
It could literally take years for RFCs to become sta
I'm not very good at reading RFCs, so I can't be sure myself. Can anyone
confirm that qmail 1.3 with the BigDNS and queuevar patches will be
compliant with whatever standards may come out of RFCs 2821 and 2822?
I'm sure that there will be some schmuck member of management will hear
about these
Hadn't seen this mentioned here, and thought it might be of general
interest.
RFCs 2821 and 2822 were published today, obsoleting the venerable RFCs
821 and 822, covering SMTP and the Internet Message Format,
respectively.
They're available from the usual places, including:
http://www.rfc-e
