james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Richard O. Hammer" <ROHam...@EarthLink.net>
Subject Re: new InputStream class for mail data
Date Tue, 15 Jul 2003 23:22:13 GMT
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>I disagree.  An empty data set can be a valid message.  I find support
>>in RFC 2821 Section 4.1.1.4.
> 
> Not RFC 2821.  RFC 2822, section 3.6:
> 
>    The only required header fields are the origination date field and
>    the originator address field(s).  All other header fields are
>    syntactically optional.

Outside RFC 2821 I don't know so well.  But I have the impression that 
SMTP message body can -- optionally -- contain a RFC 2822 message. 
But SMTP does not demand a RFC 2822 message in the body.

I wonder, do most MTA's demand that the SMTP message body be in the 
form specified by RFC 822 (or 2822)?

> In any event, if you feel that your interpretation of the RFC is correct,
> and that everyone else is wrong, please contact the IETF to explain where
> they went wrong, and ask them to issue a correction.

I thought I was doing such homework when I took the question to the 
ietf-smtp@imc.org email list.  But is that not the place to go with 
such issues?

As I have aged I think I have reduced the scope in which I take it 
upon myself to correct what I judge to be other peoples' errors.  I am 
inclined to let this drop here.  But I am not hiding.  If they need 
the truth they can find me.

> Obviously, we want to be RFC compliant.

On that score you probably need not worry.  The RFC offers two 
distinct interpretations, and offers passages for each side to cite.

Rich


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org


Mime
View raw message