IETF Logo Mail Archive

[yam] Issue #10: RFC 5321 3.9: add tiny subsection

SM <sm@resistor.net> Sun, 06 December 2009 10:44 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@resistor.net>
X-Original-To: yam@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: yam@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C12883A696F for <yam@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Dec 2009 02:44:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.506
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.506 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.093, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TfFOQfRSAsOY for <yam@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Dec 2009 02:44:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ns1.qubic.net (ns1.qubic.net [208.69.177.116]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A75E3A6403 for <yam@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Dec 2009 02:44:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from subman.resistor.net ([10.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by ns1.qubic.net (8.14.4.Beta0/8.14.4.Beta0) with ESMTP id nB6AhW2E003455 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <yam@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Dec 2009 02:43:55 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1260096237; x=1260182637; bh=SsFMdVeJ+qc62UGZOttZkedKBxq4rOltACeUZO8ccyQ=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Cc; b=iQDl7NYoqGZ/Uiy9F5nWAGD2xJd7oIz+bruXOK+a6Qpjcw6KTbhCNdXcqSZomUYnQ TRksA2T3yh6lgo8Q5gsAWbI2PleDg+qDhC/znXcE3M8XWzBt95x6RI+fSULZXXw53w yVhnE/olJIQqS0SbinaMoMqam8Lzy7Eu+2yi+bII=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=mail; d=resistor.net; c=simple; q=dns; b=U45YipXNcct9BbFrhm1sWWcBPSFiDIDyYu7VNeCT/L0FrKHqKtXFZ52m9jqt5aDlM gvYTWX7p6UynV3dl4x5XVWVXCeK9TtwSEBTrqLwIOZa093SIPi+zWyb/+8hWTb+Wtza p17ntNmG2doAzeXP4qNT+5qkARwC0b0CeuIOur4=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20091206014538.033cdcc8@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2009 01:53:19 -0800
To: yam@ietf.org
From: SM <sm@resistor.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Subject: [yam] Issue #10: RFC 5321 3.9: add tiny subsection
X-BeenThere: yam@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Yet Another Mail working group discussion list <yam.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam>, <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/yam>
List-Post: <mailto:yam@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam>, <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2009 10:44:08 -0000

Hello,

There is a proposal to rename Section 3.9 of RFC 5321 to "Forwarding" 
(Issue #10) and to add a "Backup MX" subsection.  I do not support 
this change as:

  (i) It would be a significant change to Section 3.9 between the 
Draft and Full Standard.

  (ii) There isn't any relationship between "Backup MX" and "Forwarding".

Regards,
-sm

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email