Am taking further followups to [EMAIL PROTECTED] where it belongs...
I agree that follow-ups on the topic belong to smtp lists, but I think that in
those messages you were talking about two issues, one of which it belongs in the
ietf list. (At least I see it that way).
So What do you think?
I'm not sure if this message reached the lists... I'm not a subscriber
of ietf-smtp, may be I should?
However, my comments, is that I had a look at SMTP Service Extension
for Checkpoint/Restart RFC 1845, which is Experimental. My guess is
that this RFC would need a review and may be moved to the
]
Subject: Re: Resume command for ESMTP?
On Sun, 05 Aug 2001 19:39:21 +1200, Franck Martin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
So ESMTP could have an extension called RESUME
The protocol would be standard, except that before
DATA and after RCPT
TO, the sending server who has identified
Does anyone remember the trick of breaking a single huge message into
smaller parts, to be reassembled by he final recipient?
Its called fragmentation, as I recall.
Marshall Rose implemented in his version of the RAND MH mail system.
I think this is a better solution to the whole
On Sun, 05 Aug 2001 19:39:21 +1200, Franck Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
So ESMTP could have an extension called RESUME
The protocol would be standard, except that before DATA and after RCPT
TO, the sending server who has identified the RESUME keyword could ask a
RESUME session...
For
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Resume command for ESMTP?
On Sun, 05 Aug 2001 19:39:21 +1200, Franck Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
So ESMTP could have an extension called RESUME
The protocol would be standard, except that before DATA and after RCPT
TO, the sending server who has
Franck Martin wrote:
Hi all,
I'm a newbie on IETF, so please be nice ;-)
I have been looking around, but cannot find a resume command for ESMTP.
If it already exists thanks to give me the RFC, unless I'm keen to write
an RFC something...
SMTP Service Extension for Checkpoint/Restart RFC
Am taking further followups to [EMAIL PROTECTED] where it belongs...
On Mon, 06 Aug 2001 10:11:33 +1200, Franck Martin said:
The first principle, is not to store a mail part indifinitively, but to
timeout it in the queue. The parameter should be left configurable. Let's
say that the mail
On Sun, 05 Aug 2001 16:14:36 MDT, Alexey Melnikov said:
SMTP Service Extension for Checkpoint/Restart RFC 1845.
Damn. How did that sneak by me? ;)
/Valdis
PGP signature
