[122857] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Email Portability Approved by Knesset Committee
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Larry Sheldon)
Mon Feb 22 14:24:33 2010
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:24:09 -0600
From: Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon@cox.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <fddc4e5f9aeda526d68b236708b0dbc4@yyc.orthanc.ca>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2/22/2010 1:16 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg (VE6BBM/VE7TFX) wrote:
> smb@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
http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml
