* Sylvain Hellegouarch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-05-23 17:20]:
> As we have already seen on this list, RFC4287 lacks of
> precision in some context, therefore I wonder what being
> "exactly correct" represents.

Did I miss something? I remember several oversights of omission,
but none of imprecision.

Regards,
-- 
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>

Reply via email to