From zmailer-owner@nic.funet.fi Fri May 12 16:19:30 2006 Received: from paja.nic.funet.fi ([193.166.3.10]:45502 "EHLO paja.nic.funet.fi" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by mail.zmailer.org with ESMTP id S258422AbWELNTa (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 May 2006 16:19:30 +0300 Received: (majordom@paja.nic.funet.fi) by nic.funet.fi via listexpand id S442579AbWELNTV (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 May 2006 16:19:21 +0300 Received: (majordom@paja.nic.funet.fi) by nic.funet.fi id S442593AbWELNTV (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 May 2006 16:19:21 +0300 Received: from anchor-internal-1.mail.demon.net ([195.173.56.100]:33513 "EHLO anchor-internal-1.mail.demon.net") by nic.funet.fi with ESMTP id S442579AbWELNTU (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 May 2006 16:19:20 +0300 Received: from bla-mail-1.ad.thus.net (bla-mail-1.internal.thus.net [194.159.25.138]) by anchor-internal-1.mail.demon.net with =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=20ESMTP=9C?= id k4CDJKns002764; Fri, 12 May 2006 13:19:20 GMT Received: from bla-mail-2.ad.thus.net ([194.159.25.140]) by bla-mail-1.ad.thus.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 12 May 2006 14:19:19 +0100 Received: from paulo1-adsl.demon.co.uk ([172.23.2.6]) by bla-mail-2.ad.thus.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 12 May 2006 14:19:19 +0100 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 14:17:44 +0100 To: zmailer@nic.funet.fi From: Paul Overell Subject: Re: Does the EHLO response break RFC2821 syntax? References: <44647C62.5000903@netbauds.net> In-Reply-To: <44647C62.5000903@netbauds.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=us-ascii;format=flowed User-Agent: Turnpike/6.06-M (<1kMoh1dZGCYFWmjZLdOp0TwZ6Z>) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 May 2006 13:19:19.0426 (UTC) FILETIME=[AD122620:01C675C6] Sender: zmailer-owner@nic.funet.fi Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: zmailer@nic.funet.fi Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/httpd/zmailer/html/mhalist/input.sh"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;zmailer-log@nic.funet.fi Original-Recipient: rfc822;zmailer-log@nic.funet.fi