[Raw Msg Headers][Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: why 2.6.0 ?
On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 05:31:17PM +0300, Andrey Blochintsev wrote:
> Why "2.6.0" is used as "success" extened status code? ;)
When I implemented those codes, there wasn't much published
experience/usage profiles of those codes. Most likely it was
when RFC 1893 was still in draft stages... D'uh..
I begun to use CVS in 1998, and that predates it..
It may also have been that I did intent to report some content
like reason (albeit 2.6.0 is a bit stange for that), and
continued to use it thru whole set of smtp_data()'s various
reports. Now reading i, it is obviously unsuitable.
A number of those I changed to "250 2.7.1 accepted into freezer",
primary acceptances as "250 2.0.0 ..."
A response-code review should really be done to the smtpserver.
/Matti Aarnio <email@example.com>
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe zmailer" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
- why 2.6.0 ?
- From: Andrey Blochintsev <email@example.com>