Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!pa.dec.com!vixie From: vixie@pa.dec.com (Paul Vixie) Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail Subject: Re: Idempotence of S3 Message-ID: <1991Apr19.075822.17462@pa.dec.com> Date: 19 Apr 91 07:58:22 GMT References: <1991Apr16.165044.21308@csl.dl.nec.com> <1991Apr16.213322.18417@pa.dec.com> <1991Apr16.223723.25275@csl.dl.nec.com> Sender: news@pa.dec.com (News) Organization: DEC Western Research Lab Lines: 23 In article <1991Apr16.223723.25275@csl.dl.nec.com> ylee@csl.dl.nec.com said: # Well, Paul, it would have added a great deal more weight to # your response if you could answer the questions or dispute the # reasoning that lead to those two lines in my posting. I'm sure I answered everything I saw reason to answer. Read over your questions and see if you can understand why their tone precluded any need for a reply. (These are my last public words on this thread; if you want to know more, send me e-mail.) # Remember, Paul, you are the one who declared "S3 is supposed to # be idempotent" without any supporting evidence to start with. # Why should questions of "why?" and "where is it documented?" get # you so agitated? I've been trying to avoid agitation. I can see that I should have stopped earlier. Good day, sir. Cheers, -- Paul Vixie DEC Western Research Lab Palo Alto, California, USA ...!decwrl!vixie ...!vixie!paul