Email Portability Approved by Knesset Committee
LarrySheldon at cox.net
Mon Feb 22 19:24:09 UTC 2010
On 2/22/2010 1:16 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg (VE6BBM/VE7TFX) wrote:
> smb at cs.columbia.edu:
>> I am seriously suggesting that a redirect mechanism -- perhaps the email equivalent of HTPP's 301/302 -- would be worth considering.
> We already have SMTP's 221 and 521 response codes for this. But because the
> response text is free-form there's no way to reliably parse out the new address.
> Fixing this is a bit tricky since the SMTP grammar defines <Reply-line> in
> a way that makes it difficult to return the sort of structed response you
> would need.
I don't think I know the details of the law, but I would guess that
"address portability" does not imply "the address you have reach is not
in service. The new address is....."
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to
take everything you have."
Remember: The Ark was built by amateurs, the Titanic by professionals.
Requiescas in pace o email
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio
Eppure si rinfresca
ICBM Targeting Information: http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs
More information about the NANOG