[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
On Thu, 26 Mar 1998 email@example.com wrote:
> Chris, please reread the abstract for the draft:
> This Internet Draft describes some experimental extensions to the Post
> Office Protocol [POP3]. These extensions are described here for
> historical purposes. The status of this Internet Draft will be
> Experimental. New implementations of POP3 clients and servers are not
> expected to implement these extensions.
> In other words, I agree that the extensions are poorly designed. However, I
> disagree about their not needing to be documented.
If it's a historical document, then:
(a) it shouldn't be published as an RFC until the SMTP AUTH extension is
(b) it should be published as Historic, not Experimental. Experimental
means "please try this, but it may change" while Historic means "don't use