Talk:Source routing: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Latest revision as of 15:04, 11 April 2024

Computing: Networking Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Low-importance).

This article looks factually correct to me, so I'm removing the disputed tag. If you think the article is incorrect, please leave a comment in the discussion page to go with the disputed tag. Evand 07:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Source routing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080224174623/http://www.iss.net:80/security_center/advice/Underground/Hacking/Methods/Technical/Source_Routing/default.htm to http://www.iss.net/security_center/advice/Underground/Hacking/Methods/Technical/Source_Routing/default.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:45, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What about e-mail?[edit]

Source routing has also been used for entire messages in e-mail, although in is now obsolete.^[1]

References

^ Simple Mail Transfer Protocol. October 2008. sec. F.2. doi:10.17487/RFC5321. RFC 5321. Retrieved April 11, 2024. RFC 821 utilized the concept of explicit source routing to get mail from one host to another via a series of relays. The requirement to utilize source routes in regular mail traffic was eliminated by the introduction of the domain name system "MX" record and the last significant justification for them was eliminated by the introduction, in RFC 1123, of a clear requirement that addresses following an "@" must all be fully-qualified domain names. Consequently, the only remaining justifications for the use of source routes are support for very old SMTP clients or MUAs and in mail system debugging. They can, however, still be useful in the latter circumstance and for routing mail around serious, but temporary, problems such as problems with the relevant DNS records.

[1] Simple Mail Transfer Protocol. October 2008. sec. F.2. doi:10.17487/RFC5321. RFC 5321. Retrieved April 11, 2024. RFC 821 utilized the concept of explicit source routing to get mail from one host to another via a series of relays. The requirement to utilize source routes in regular mail traffic was eliminated by the introduction of the domain name system "MX" record and the last significant justification for them was eliminated by the introduction, in RFC 1123, of a clear requirement that addresses following an "@" must all be fully-qualified domain names. Consequently, the only remaining justifications for the use of source routes are support for very old SMTP clients or MUAs and in mail system debugging. They can, however, still be useful in the latter circumstance and for routing mail around serious, but temporary, problems such as problems with the relevant DNS records.

[1]

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 Cheers.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier;">cyberbot II</sup>]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS;">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green;">Talk to my owner</span>]]:Online</sub></small> 13:45, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
+== What about e-mail? ==
+Source routing has also been used for entire messages in e-mail, although in is now obsolete.<ref>{{cite IETF
+ | rfc          = 5321
+ | title        = Simple Mail Transfer Protocol
+ | appendix     = F.2.
+ | quote        = RFC 821 utilized the concept of explicit source routing to get mail from one host to another via a series of relays.  The requirement to utilize source routes in regular mail traffic was eliminated by the introduction of the domain name system "MX" record and the last significant justification for them was eliminated by the introduction, in RFC 1123, of a clear requirement that addresses following an "@" must all be fully-qualified domain names.  Consequently, the only remaining justifications for the use of source routes are support for very old SMTP clients or MUAs and in mail system debugging. They can, however, still be useful in the latter circumstance and for routing mail around serious, but temporary, problems such as problems with the relevant DNS records.
+ | date         = October 2008
+ | access-date  = April 11, 2024
+ }}
+</ref>
+<!-- keep after last sig -->
+{{reflist-talk}}