Precisely, or vice versa, but what people should be worrying about isn't RFC compliance, but interoperability and better design.
Exactly...this is what the proposed RFC's and the IETF is attempting to do. But these is no ESP, so there has to be a consortium to make standards to ease interoperability.
I agree with you, but I have to accept what's what unless I am willing to draft a different approcah, submit it, etc.
Gerardo
Dan Melomedman wrote:
Gerardo Gregory wrote:
Dan,
Read -> RFC 1796 first;
Just cause it is mentioned as/or referenced to an RFC does not make it a standard.
Precisely, or vice versa, but what people should be worrying about isn't RFC compliance, but interoperability and better design. Whether it means RFC compliance, standards compliance, or neither.
Furthermore, some things in RFCs are just plain wrong or bad by design, DSN (ugly design, plus you can't control it, and you can't do anything about it, so why bother in the first place?) and MIME included (Email should have been designed to be 8-bit clean from the start). The the job of email servers should have been to copy messages around, not parse them. Welcome to the Internet: it sort-of works.
------------------------------------------------------- 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
