-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Roeland,
Fear does that to some people.
Gene Marsh
Diebold Incorporated
- -----Original Message-----
From: Roeland M.J. Meyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, March 27, 1999 1:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [IFWP] Re: Public use of new gTLDs
Hello el,
It is appearing that I was the victim of a little projection on your
part.
I hope you don't mind if I resent that. You have a technical problem
with
Richard and you take it out on the whole ORSC. I just happened to be
there,
with the wrong message, at the wrong time, and you dump on me. I hope
you
don't mind my returning the favor someday. This is patently unfair.
I expected better of you Doc. We've always gotten along pretty good in
the
past. Why the heart-burn now?
At 06:14 PM 3/27/99 +0200, Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
>Richard,
>
>In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Richard J. Sexton" writes:
>
>> If there's some change I need to make to my MTA to make you happy
>> I'd like to know what it is, but I'm still waiting for a response
to
>> this from a couple of days ago:
>
>I'd appreciate an extract from your log files showing delivery, my
>maillog was rolled over Mar 25 04:02:05 (Mar 24 21:02:05 your time)
>and I can find neither message in it.
>
>
>
>> Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 15:11:22 -0500 (EST)
>> From: Tim Gibson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: cybercops
>>
>> Well,
>>
>
>> I can assure you that all nodes making any kind of SMTP traffic at
>> IMC or connected downstream of IMC are some version of sendmail. If
>> the good Dr. would be so kind as to actually read what's contained
>> in RFC 821. I'm sure that he'll see that the correct response to a
>> 450 error [requested mail action not taken because the mailbox is
>> UNAVAILABLE] is up to the client. The mail server takes no action
>> other than the generation of the error. The correct coarse of
>> further mail action is the responsiblity of the client side
>> software.
>
>> The client side must make the decision to buffer in the spool and
>> try again or to inform the user that the mail box doesn't exist.
>
>That's what I am saying all along.
>
>Make it stop sending with these funnies in the SMTP envelope!
>
>> It is the fault of the good DR.'s mailer program for recieving the
>> bounce. Sendmail DOES NOT create a bounce, the client side does.
>
>I never talked about receiving any bounce.
>
>
>el
___________________________________________________
Roeland M.J. Meyer -
e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet phone: hawk.lvrmr.mhsc.com
Personal web pages: http://staff.mhsc.com/~rmeyer
Company web-site: http://www.mhsc.com
___________________________________________________
KISS ... gotta love it!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.0.2
iQA/AwUBNwBWtpHtPfG6xLnPEQKThwCfZtWt7CTzdMKk6rcMPQrWAMmRAckAn14I
Ej5T9R+tLZw3Tb3DPL8ln7yq
=8cwp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
