nanog mailing list archives
Re: Possible solution? (e-mail parcel vs. FTP)
From: "E.B. Dreger" <eddy+public+spam () noc everquick net>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 17:03:48 +0000 (GMT)
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 12:59:01 -0400 From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu message/external-body was first described in RFC1341, in June 1992.
I was not aware of that.
Hardly a new idea...
Not a new idea, but where are the implementations? :-) That said, I have another RFC that I must read. Eddy --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. EverQuick Internet Division Phone: (316) 794-8922 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:23:58 +0000 (GMT) From: A Trap <blacklist () brics com> To: blacklist () brics com Subject: Please ignore this portion of my mail signature. These last few lines are a trap for address-harvesting spambots. Do NOT send mail to <blacklist () brics com>, or you are likely to be blocked.
Current thread:
- Possible solution? (e-mail parcel vs. FTP) E.B. Dreger (May 25)
- Re: Possible solution? (e-mail parcel vs. FTP) Valdis . Kletnieks (May 25)
- Re: Possible solution? (e-mail parcel vs. FTP) E.B. Dreger (May 25)
- Re: Possible solution? (e-mail parcel vs. FTP) Matt Martini (May 26)
- Re: Possible solution? (e-mail parcel vs. FTP) Greg A. Woods (May 26)
- Re: Possible solution? (e-mail parcel vs. FTP) Sabri Berisha (May 28)
- Re: Possible solution? (e-mail parcel vs. FTP) Valdis . Kletnieks (May 25)