Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id OAA27939; Thu, 1 Jun 1995 14:11:41 -0400 X-Resent-To: drums@CS.UTK.EDU ; Thu, 1 Jun 1995 14:11:40 EDT Errors-to: owner-drums@CS.UTK.EDU Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id OAA27929; Thu, 1 Jun 1995 14:11:35 -0400 Received: from UW-Gateway.Panda.COM by Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (NX5.67e/UW-NDC Revision: 2.27.MRC ) id AA09596; Thu, 1 Jun 95 11:10:54 -0700 Received: from localhost by Ikkoku-Kan.Panda.COM (NX5.67e/UW-NDC/Panda Revision: 2.27.MRC ) id AA20893; Thu, 1 Jun 95 11:10:45 -0700 Date: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 11:05:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Sender: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: end-of-message indication in SMTP To: John Gardiner Myers Cc: drums@CS.UTK.EDU In-Reply-To: <0jnSEla00WBwA9xqMG@andrew.cmu.edu> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII On Thu, 1 Jun 1995 12:00:49 -0400 (EDT), John Gardiner Myers wrote: > The octet sequence . would thus only qualify as "binary data" > and would have to be transfer-encoded in order to be sent over base > SMTP or ESMTP with the 8BITMIME extension. This seems fine to me. > > 1) Simplify the syntax, remove obnoxious restrictions: > > a) Remove ".", "[", and "]" from specials. > > b) Redefine local-part as word. > > c) Redefine domain as atom. > > d) Remove sub-domain, domain-literal, and domain-ref > > I'm not sure it is within the charter to loosen the syntax. I would > like to tighten it up to get rid of some hard-to-parse constructs that > are never used. I hope that the answer is yes and yes (but I would like to hear what you think is "never used" first), but we should get a charter ruling first. I believe that my proposed loosening not only simplifies the syntax, it's also what most people actually implement. > I think we might be in a situation where we need two syntaxes, one for > sending, one for receiving. If you saw the code in c-client, this is exactly what I do; I parse according to the looser syntax, and generate according to strict 822. I'd hate to put that in the spec, but it's certainly the pragmatic approach. > As an aside, a *lot* of things have been fixed in sendmail version 8. > For example, Errors-To: is ignored by default. I usually say that > people who complain about sendmail should take a look at recent > versions. Old versions of sendmail are never going to go away. Nor are people who decide that the way to implement things is to copy what old versions of sendmail do. *Sigh* -- Mark -- DoD #0105, R90/6 pilot FAX: (206) 842-0758 ICBM: N 47.36'24" W 122.34'08" TOPS-20: A Great Improvement Over Its Successors