Re: why 2.6.0 ?

[Matti Aarnio <mea@nic.funet.fi>]

On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 05:31:17PM +0300, Andrey Blochintsev wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> 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	<mea@nic.funet.fi>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe zmailer" in
the body of a message to majordomo@nic.funet.fi