Date: Sun, 1 Dec 1996 15:48:17 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: stesin@gu.net (Andrew Stesin) Cc: terry@lambert.org, peter@taronga.com, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Lex/Yacc question Message-ID: <199612012248.PAA08406@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.95.961130132144.26636A-100000@creator.gu.kiev.ua> from "Andrew Stesin" at Nov 30, 96 01:22:43 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Fri, 29 Nov 1996, Terry Lambert wrote: > > > > Because of RFC1341/RFC1342 syntax extensions. > > > Do you mean RFC#1521/RFC#1522 ? (The ones you noticed are obsolete, > AFAIK). Yes. But, of course, I want to be able to use a switch to set compliance level, actually, so 1341/1342 are included. Didn't 1341 describe the EHLO mechanism, still in use? Was that part superceded as well? Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199612012248.PAA08406>