Re: Need for RSET?

RANDY@mpa15ab.mv.unisys.com Mon, 12 February 1996 03:13 UTC

Message-Id: <ECNV01517F6C39@MPA15AB>
Date: 11 FEB 96 19:04
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: RANDY@mpa15ab.mv.unisys.com
To: ietf-smtp%list.cren.net@mvdns1.mv.unisys.com, NED%innosoft.com@mvdns1.mv.unisys.com
MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Subject: Re: Need for RSET?
In-Reply-To: Your message of "10 Feb 1996 11:02:20 -0800"

On 10 Feb 1996 11:02:20 -0800, Ned Freed <NED@innosoft.com> wrote:

> It depends on the prior state. A RSET is absolutely necessary if
> there's a prior transaction in progress.

Of course, if one is aborting a transaction, or clearing certain error
states, a RSET is required.

> Sending it is a *really* good idea, as the are some systems that
> require it on second and subsequent transactions within a session....

That's what I suspected.  Thanks very much for confirming it clearly.

> However, this is really a DRUMS issue and not something the
> pipelining document should be addressing,

Should it be brought up on the DRUMS list?  That client SMTPs should
send RSET before MAIL FROM on subsequent transactions, but server SMTPs
must not require a RSET?

----
|Randall Gellens             |                    randy@mv.unisys.com|
|Opinions are personal;  facts are suspect;   I speak only for myself|