RE: mail-abuse.org tests, and weird addresses...

["Woodhouse, Gregory J." <gregory.woodhouse@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I believe it's in last call now.

===
Gregory Woodhouse <gregory.woodhouse@xxxxxxxxxx>
Financial Product Line
+1 415 744 6362
"Computer science is no more about computers than astronomy is
about telescopes." -- E.W. Dijkstra


-----Original Message-----
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx [mailto:Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 2:34 PM
To: John C Klensin
Cc: ietf-smtp@xxxxxxx; drums@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: mail-abuse.org tests, and weird addresses... 


On Wed, 19 Jul 2000 00:07:40 EDT, John C Klensin said:
> If my memory is correct, 501 (syntax error) is intended, as was
> the exclusion of 553 from the MAIL FROM responses.  I agree that
> the 1123 text is a little muddy (and it is probably at least
> partially my fault).  Please take a look at
> draft-ietf-drums-smtpupd-12.txt and see if you think it is clear
> and good enough; if not, comments should probably go to the DRUMS
> list (copied on this response).

Yes, 501 *is* the correct error, and your example of an embedded blank
getting a 553 was better.

smtpupd section 4.3.2 specifically allows any/all of 501, 550, and 553
on the MAIL FROM: which gives future releases of Sendmail sufficient room
to work.  That text looks good and reasonable.

Is there a target date for smtpupd to move out of Draft status and into
RFC, where it will be more cite-able without being a moving target?


-- 
				Valdis Kletnieks
				Operating Systems Analyst
				Virginia Tech