IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: RSET scope issue

Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> Tue, 15 August 2000 03:16 UTC

Received: from cs.utk.edu (CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA24292 for <drums-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Aug 2000 23:16:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id XAA19695; Mon, 14 Aug 2000 23:16:37 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by cs.utk.edu (bulk_mailer v1.13); Mon, 14 Aug 2000 23:16:35 -0400
Received: by cs.utk.edu (cf v2.9s-UTK) id XAA19677; Mon, 14 Aug 2000 23:16:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from windlord.stanford.edu (marvin@localhost) by cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id XAA19664; Mon, 14 Aug 2000 23:16:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from windlord.stanford.edu (171.64.12.23 -> windlord.Stanford.EDU) by cs.utk.edu (smtpshim v1.0); Mon, 14 Aug 2000 23:16:33 -0400
Received: (qmail 22511 invoked by uid 50); 15 Aug 2000 03:16:30 -0000
To: Detailed Revision/Update of Message Standards <drums@cs.utk.edu>
Subject: Re: RSET scope issue
References: <03F40A4BFEFAD111B55E0000F81E4FB1603874@VHAISFEXC1>
In-Reply-To: "Woodhouse, Gregory J."'s message of "Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:06:08 -0500"
From: Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>
Organization: The Eyrie
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:16:30 -0700
Message-ID: <ylitt3b4dt.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu>
Lines: 21
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) XEmacs/21.1 (Biscayne)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:drums-request@cs.utk.edu?Subject=unsubscribe>

Woodhouse, Gregory J <gregory.woodhouse@med.va.gov> writes:

> It basically makes sense to me. It seems that what is happening here is an
> unstated assumption that transactions will never be nested, so an RSET
> always goes back to the top level (immediately after EHLO). This ought to
> either be made explicit or some language like "the current transaction must
> be reset to its initial state" should be used instead. I'm not sure if just
> deleting the phrase is the right approach because it seems to rely on
> knowledge of an unstated assumption.

Doesn't this part of the current text already cover that?

  This command specifies that the current mail transaction will be
  aborted.  Any stored sender, recipients, and mail data MUST be
  discarded, and all buffers and state tables cleared.

I had the same question at first, but on re-reading that seems to sum up
everything that RSET should do.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status