On Fri, Jul 08, 2005, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: [please do not Cc' me, thanks]
> The important sentence in that is: "The dialog is purposely lock-step". So > 2821 is slightly self-contradictory, this is not news. (note that the command > in question is an effective null command of connection opening). This is only "slightly self-contradictory" if you consider connection opening "an effective null command" which is certainly an unusual interpretation and IMHO not covered by RFC 2821. BTW: please bring those "slightly self-contradictory" items up on ietf-smtp when RFC2821bis will be published (probably next week). If there's anything unclear in RFC2821(bis) then now is the chance to fix it. > If you see violations of SHOULDs, it's also always worth asking what the > good reason is. I'm not questioning that. It's maybe just a bit "nit picking": the error message is misleading as it is not a _violation_ of RFC 2821. -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
