kevent: fix directory check

[users/heiko/exim.git] / doc / doc-misc / RFC.conform

diff --git a/doc/doc-misc/RFC.conform b/doc/doc-misc/RFC.conform
index 2fc57cdf263c81b7fb44e80e4bfb5b3e7c633d2e..1ddd5b33d586ebe9941febe663ab5a6c48726e34 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/doc-misc/RFC.conform
+++ b/doc/doc-misc/RFC.conform
@@ -1,5 +1,3 @@
-$Cambridge: exim/doc/doc-misc/RFC.conform,v 1.1 2004/10/08 10:38:47 ph10 Exp $
-

 Conformance with RFCs
 ---------------------
 
 Conformance with RFCs
 ---------------------
 


@@ -100,7 +98,7 @@ enclosed in <> characters, so a header such as
 
   From: @a,@b:c@d
 
 
   From: @a,@b:c@d
 

-is syntactally invalid. Exim does not enforce this restriction.
+is syntactically invalid. Exim does not enforce this restriction.

 
 
 1.6 Local parts [3.4.1]
 
 
 1.6 Local parts [3.4.1]


@@ -182,22 +180,7 @@ incoming messages, but neither of these affect its handling of message data.
 achieves what the user wants more often than other strategies.
 
 
 achieves what the user wants more often than other strategies.
 
 

-2.3 Use of EHLO/HELO [3.2]
---------------------------
-
-[Client MTAs should always start with EHLO, not HELO.]
-
-Exim sends EHLO only when it finds the string "ESMTP" in an SMTP greeting
-message. If EHLO is refused with a 5xx return code, it then reverts to HELO as
-required, but it does not contain logic for converting to HELO on other errors
-such as loss of connection or timeout after EHLO. That is one reason why it
-doesn't always send EHLO; there are reported to be ancient SMTP servers out
-there which collapse on receiving EHLO. (There is also at least one server
-whose banner reads "<host name> ignores ESMTP", but it is RFC 821 compliant in
-that it responds with 5O0 to EHLO, so Exim successfully reverts to HELO.)
-
-
-2.4 Closing the connection [4.1.1.10]
+2.3 Closing the connection [4.1.1.10]

 -------------------------------------
 
 [Client must wait for response to QUIT before closing the connection.]
 -------------------------------------
 
 [Client must wait for response to QUIT before closing the connection.]


@@ -216,7 +199,7 @@ before the response arrives. The subsequent arrival of the response then causes
 bad behaviour.
 
 
 bad behaviour.
 
 

-2.5 IPv6 address literals [4.1.2]
+2.4 IPv6 address literals [4.1.2]

 ---------------------------------
 
 [IPv6 address literals are introduced by "IPv6".]
 ---------------------------------
 
 [IPv6 address literals are introduced by "IPv6".]


@@ -227,7 +210,7 @@ prefix. At present, it does not even recognize the prefix. When IPv6 becomes
 more widespread, Exim will follow whatever the common usage is.
 
 
 more widespread, Exim will follow whatever the common usage is.
 
 

-2.6 Underscores in domain names [4.1.2]
+2.5 Underscores in domain names [4.1.2]

 ---------------------------------------
 
 [Underscores are not legal in domain names.]
 ---------------------------------------
 
 [Underscores are not legal in domain names.]


@@ -243,7 +226,7 @@ it will accept any old junk after EHLO or HELO. Such is the woeful state of
 some SMTP clients.)
 
 
 some SMTP clients.)
 
 

-2.7 Removal of return-path headers [4.4]
+2.6 Removal of return-path headers [4.4]

 ----------------------------------------
 
 [Relaying MTAs should not remove return-path.]
 ----------------------------------------
 
 [Relaying MTAs should not remove return-path.]


@@ -254,18 +237,18 @@ not. Indeed, for some messages it might be both a relay and a final destination
 MTA for the same message.
 
 
 MTA for the same message.
 
 

-2.8 Randomizing the order of addresses of multihomed hosts [5]
+2.7 Randomizing the order of addresses of multihomed hosts [5]

 --------------------------------------------------------------
 
 [Multihomed host addresses should not be randomized.]
 
 Exim does randomize a list of several addresses for a single host, because
 --------------------------------------------------------------
 
 [Multihomed host addresses should not be randomized.]
 
 Exim does randomize a list of several addresses for a single host, because

-caching in resolvers will defeat the round-robinning that many namerservers
+caching in resolvers will defeat the round-robinning that many nameservers

 use. (Note: this is not the same as randomizing equal-valued MX records. That
 is required by the RFC.)
 
 
 use. (Note: this is not the same as randomizing equal-valued MX records. That
 is required by the RFC.)
 
 

-2.9 Handling "MX points to self" [5]
+2.8 Handling "MX points to self" [5]

 ------------------------------------
 
 [MX points to self must be treated as an error.]
 ------------------------------------
 
 [MX points to self must be treated as an error.]


@@ -276,7 +259,7 @@ Exim configuration is compliant, but it is possible to configure Exim to behave
 differently, and there are several situations where this can be useful.
 
 
 differently, and there are several situations where this can be useful.
 
 

-2.10 Source routing [6.1]
+2.9 Source routing [6.1]

 -------------------------
 
 [Source routes should be stripped.]
 -------------------------
 
 [Source routes should be stripped.]


@@ -288,7 +271,7 @@ does not add host routing to reverse-paths when processing a source-routed
 forward-path.
 
 
 forward-path.
 
 

-2.11 Loop detection [6.2]
+2.10 Loop detection [6.2]

 -------------------------
 
 [Loop count for Received: headers should be at least 100.]
 -------------------------
 
 [Loop count for Received: headers should be at least 100.]


@@ -298,7 +281,7 @@ these days seem to accumulate less than half a dozen Received: headers, and
 even a couple of forwardings don't bring this anywhere near 30.
 
 
 even a couple of forwardings don't bring this anywhere near 30.
 
 

-2.12 Addition of missing headers [6.3]
+2.11 Addition of missing headers [6.3]

 --------------------------------------
 
 [Missing headers may be added, and domains qualified, only if client is
 --------------------------------------
 
 [Missing headers may be added, and domains qualified, only if client is


@@ -309,7 +292,7 @@ the source of the message, and likewise when it expands non-fully-qualified
 domains, it does so independently of the message's source.
 
 
 domains, it does so independently of the message's source.
 
 

-2.13 Syntax of MAIL and RCPT commands [4.1.1.2, 4.1.1.3]
+2.12 Syntax of MAIL and RCPT commands [4.1.1.2, 4.1.1.3]

 --------------------------------------------------------
 
 Exim is more relaxed than the RFC requires:
 --------------------------------------------------------
 
 Exim is more relaxed than the RFC requires:


@@ -327,7 +310,7 @@ Exim is more relaxed than the RFC requires:
     unquoted full stops.
 
 
     unquoted full stops.
 
 

-2.14 Non-fully-qualified domains [2.3.5]
+2.13 Non-fully-qualified domains [2.3.5]

 ----------------------------------------
 
 [All domains must be fully qualified.]
 ----------------------------------------
 
 [All domains must be fully qualified.]


@@ -343,7 +326,7 @@ as well as to locally-originated addresses. Address re-writing could also be
 used for this purpose.
 
 
 used for this purpose.
 
 

-2.15 Unqualified addresses [4.1.2]
+2.14 Unqualified addresses [4.1.2]

 ----------------------------------
 
 [Addresses in SMTP commands must include domains.]
 ----------------------------------
 
 [Addresses in SMTP commands must include domains.]


@@ -360,7 +343,7 @@ domains in SMTP commands. Any such address that is accepted (including
 <postmaster>) is qualified by adding the value of the qualify_domain option.
 
 
 <postmaster>) is qualified by adding the value of the qualify_domain option.
 
 

-2.16 VRFY and EXPN [3.5.1, 3.5.2, 3.5.3, 7.3]
+2.15 VRFY and EXPN [3.5.1, 3.5.2, 3.5.3, 7.3]

 ---------------------------------------------
 
 [VRFY and EXPN should be supported.]
 ---------------------------------------------
 
 [VRFY and EXPN should be supported.]


@@ -369,7 +352,7 @@ Exim does not support VRFY and EXPN by default, but a list of hosts and
 networks for which they are permitted can be given.
 
 
 networks for which they are permitted can be given.
 
 

-2.17 Checking of EHLO/HELO commands [4.1.4]
+2.16 Checking of EHLO/HELO commands [4.1.4]

 -------------------------------------------
 
 [Client must send EHLO. Server must not refuse message if EHLO/HELO check
 -------------------------------------------
 
 [Client must send EHLO. Server must not refuse message if EHLO/HELO check


@@ -389,13 +372,13 @@ It is possible to specify exception lists of hosts and/or networks for which
 this check does not apply.
 
 
 this check does not apply.
 
 

-2.18 Format of delivery error messages [3.7]
+2.17 Format of delivery error messages [3.7]

 --------------------------------------------
 
 [Standard report formats should be used if possible.]
 
 --------------------------------------------
 
 [Standard report formats should be used if possible.]
 

-Exim's delivery failure reports do not conform to the format described in RFC
-1894.
+Exim's delivery failure reports are MIME format, and might be RFC1894
+conformant, but this has not been verified.

 
 
 ## End ##
 
 
 ## End ##