On Mon, 14 Jan 2019, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
On Mon 2019-01-14 16:43:15 -0500, John Levine wrote:
To show that you read it, please include the first word in the text
on page 50 of RFC 5321 in your reply.
I'm sorry to spoil it for everyone that the word is "The" :P
Sigh. Nope.
TCP-info variant of Extended-Domain in the By-domain expansion of Stamp.
While the Domain part of that ABNF doesn't describe how it's supposed to
be derived from "Information derived by server from TCP connection" for
the BY clause specifically, i think using it for SNI is entirely
reasonable.
Right. As far as I can tell, it's there for symmetry with the FROM clause
where the first domain is the HELO/EHLO and the second is the rDNS for the
connecting IP. I don't think I've ever seen the second name used in the
BY clause.
I know that you're frustrated, but please be gentler with people who
don't have as much in-depth knowledge of the RFCs as you do.
Wait a minute -- this is the UTA working group of the IETF. The point of
this group is to revise and extend and update and write RFCs. If people
can't be bothered to read the RFCs they're purportedly working on, why are
they here? I realize that some of the RFCs are long, but they have tables
of contents. It's not hard to check the syntax of something rather than
guessing and wasting everyone's time. I checked the syntax in RFCs 5321,
5322, and 8314 before I asked my question, and other people can too.
Regards,
John Levine, [email protected], Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
_______________________________________________
Uta mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
