Read -> RFC 1796 first;
Just cause it is mentioned as/or referenced to an RFC does not make it a standard.
If it is a standard and you still have a better way to accomplish what the standard is implying then RFC 2926
is for you.
The standards is what I am very critical about [I find it humorous that they are reffered to as STD's].
DNS [commonly refered to as RFC 1035 (previous 1034)] is actualy STD 0013
Mail Routing and the Domain System [commonly refered to as RFC 974] is expressed in STD 0014
This is not a Facist state, if anyone feels the need to propose any different then the floor is open once again RFC 2926 comes to mind.
Gerardo Gregory
Dan Melomedman wrote:
Gerardo Gregory wrote:
If he broke the mx entries on purpose then ask him where in the RFC it states that type of methadology, or what "best business" practice is he following here.
Too bad some RFCs don't always make sense. DSN is a good example. What a waste of bandwidth and disk space.
------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
