Re: RSET scope issue

[Russ Allbery <[e-mail]>]

Chris Newman <[e-mail]> writes:

> There is a bug in the definition of the RSET command in section 4.1.1.5
> of draft 12.  The current text follows:

>   4.1.1.5 RESET (RSET)

>   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.  The receiver MUST send a "250 OK" reply
>   to a RSET command with no arguments.  A reset command may be issued by the
>   client at any time.  It is effectively equivalent to a NOOP (i.e., if has
>   no effect) if issued immediately after EHLO, before EHLO is issued in the
>   session, after an end-of-data indicator has been sent and acknowledged, or
>   immediately before a QUIT. In other situations, it restores the state to
>                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>   that immediately after the most recent EHLO.  An SMTP server MUST NOT close
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>   the connection as the result of receiving a RSET; that action is reserved
>   for QUIT (see section 4.1.1.10).

> The sentence I have marked is incorrect in the presence of the "AUTH" or
> "STARTTLS" extensions and is generally contradictory with the definition
> of "RSET", namely to reset the _transaction state_ rather than the
> _connection state_.

> I propose that the sentence marked above be deleted.

I support this change.

-- 
Russ Allbery ([e-mail])             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>