IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] draft-kucherawy-received-state

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com> Tue, 10 January 2012 18:06 UTC

Return-Path: <msk@cloudmark.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A561821F87CF for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 10:06:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.576
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.576 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.023, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m1Kt3MxBF+Wv for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 10:06:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DEE521F8795 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 10:06:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from spite.corp.cloudmark.com (172.22.10.72) by EXCH-HTCAS901.corp.cloudmark.com (172.22.10.73) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.355.2; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 10:06:19 -0800
Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by spite.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.72]) with mapi; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 10:06:26 -0800
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com>
To: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 10:06:25 -0800
Thread-Topic: [apps-discuss] draft-kucherawy-received-state
Thread-Index: AczPaiskpH9CYn1oQlOHSav5APxy9gAWEqWw
Message-ID: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C157D3@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com>
References: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C157BD@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <CADBvc9_Re+FqjAF7GC42N319m-4dyAGwnD0G0yhbFKCRwd4dLA@mail.gmail.com> <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C157CC@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <CADBvc98DKENYA0JKnz7f90RQvbdopnauGZV_R24Lb_k5waOAcA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADBvc98DKENYA0JKnz7f90RQvbdopnauGZV_R24Lb_k5waOAcA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] draft-kucherawy-received-state
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 18:06:30 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mykyta Yevstifeyev [mailto:evnikita2@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 11:34 PM
> To: Murray S. Kucherawy
> Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] draft-kucherawy-received-state
> 
> Yes, this is better.  And with respect to allowing comments after
> separate 'state' clauses?

The [CFWS] at the end of the ABNF for "Stamp" (RFC5321, Section 4.4) allows this.

-MSK

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email