Talk:Extended SMTP

Keywords

I wonder if the different keywords would merit their own articles, or if a short summary in this article would suffice? AUTH already has an article dedicated to it, and there are a few that could do with some additional explanation (STARTTLS for one). Any opinions on this? Milliped 18:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

STARTTLS would be nice for ESMTPS, but I'm not sure if it deserves its own article. We have SASL, SMTP AUTH, and TLS for details wrt STARTTLS, anything else about it could go in a new section in this article. But if you're more comfortable with a separate article go, we can merge it later if the outcome shows that that's better. -- Omniplex 19:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to write the complete RFC 2476 (submit) story from SMTP-after-POP over CRAM MD5 ESMTPA up to ESMTPS / ESMTPSA a separate article is of course the way to go, sorry, a lack of caffeine on my side :-) -- Omniplex 19:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe STARTTLS should be redirected here. Thats plain wrong. STARTTLS can be used with many other protocols and is not tied with SMTP alone —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wk muriithi (talk • contribs) 10:50, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I have forgotten how to remove redirection. I wonder if someone can help me remove the above redirect and at least redirect STARTTLS to TLS for the time being. Thanks in advance. gathima (talk) 10:59, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sample conversation

Anyone willing to write a sample conversation like the ones at POP3 or SMTP? They're especially helpful for those of us troubleshooting mail server access problems. — SheeEttin {T/C} 20:33, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

set and for new

I get confused reading these words.Unfree (talk) 05:00, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Computing

I have removed the WikiProject tag, as this article is either a redirect or deleted. If you oppose, please restore the tag. Thank you, fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 16:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why not punycode?

Does anyone knows of a reliable source that explains why they are thinking more about additional fields and complicated downgrading negotiations systems and such, instead of just using punycode like on IDNs for UTF8SMTP? --TiagoTiago (talk) 07:15, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of supporting servers

I would expect more or less all modern mail servers to be ESMTP compliant, not just the 3 listed.