From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/34660 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Steven E. Harris" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: SMTP question (not quite Gnus-related) Date: 08 Feb 2001 09:18:32 -0800 Organization: Tenzing Communications Inc. Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: <87lmrhm6tz.fsf@torus.tenzing.com> References: <87y9vujkvd.fsf@torus.tenzing.com> <87lmrij8e2.fsf@inanna.rimspace.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035170545 31528 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 03:22:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:22:25 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from karazm.math.uh.edu (karazm.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.1]) by mailhost.sclp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C42E4D049D for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:24:20 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by karazm.math.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAC10732; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:23:51 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Thu, 08 Feb 2001 11:23:12 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from mailhost.sclp.com (postfix@66-209.196.61.interliant.com [209.196.61.66] (may be forged)) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA21226 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:23:02 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from ts-exch01.tenzing.com (ts-exch01.tenzing.com [63.115.0.25]) by mailhost.sclp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBC96D049D for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:23:32 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from torus (torus.seattle.tenzing.com [63.115.3.200]) by ts-exch01.tenzing.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id 1PWQJA8K; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 09:23:32 -0800 Original-Received: from seh by torus with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 14QuiG-0003d3-00 for ; Thu, 08 Feb 2001 09:18:32 -0800 Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE's message of "08 Feb 2001 14:22:03 +0100" User-Agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) XEmacs/21.1 (Capitol Reef) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Original-Lines: 29 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:34660 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:34660 Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Gro=DFjohann) writes: [...] > By this reading, "." is *two* lines: an empty line and a > line containing only a dot. Well, I think that there can be line content before the first and still have the . be a valid terminator. > In "DATAfoo.", does the message contain "foo" or > "foo"? Or even "foo"? This is the same question I asked in my previous post a few minutes ago. I think that the message just contains "foo," because there must be some way for you to send "foo" and get "foo" back out on the other side. If you send "foo" and you get back "foo," that would seem like an intolerable asymmetry in a "transparency" mechanism. That would then raise another question: If you meant to send "foo," then would the SMTP encoding be "foo." or just "foo."? Who owns that first ?!? I hope it's clear that I'm not trying to nitpick. I must have defined behavior for this stream, and it's supposed to work "transparently." --=20 Steven E. Harris :: steven.harris@tenzing.com Tenzing :: http://www.tenzing.com