Список RFC для работы с электронной почтой.

Частенько возникают вопросы, а что, да как работает. Почтовые программы работают на основе описанных стандартов - RFC. Ниже приведен их список.

 

               Список RFC для работы с электронной почтой.    Автор phpclub.ru 20.12.2006 г.

 

• RFC 821 – Simple Mail Transfer Protocol - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc821.html
  О том, как нужно общаться с SMTP-сервером через сокеты. Основные команды, поддерживаемые практически всеми, даже очень старыми серверами.
• RFC 2821 – Simple Mail Transfer Protocol - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2821.html
  This document is a self-contained specification of the basic protocol for the Internet electronic mail transport. It consolidates, updates and clarifies, but doesn't add new or change existing functionality.
• RFC 822 – Standard for the format of ARPA Internet text messages - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc822.html
  Структура тела и стандарт на заголовки в почтовом сообщении
• RFC 2822 – Internet Message Format - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2822.html
  This standard specifies a syntax for text messages that are sent between computer users, within the framework of “electronic mail” messages. This standard supersedes the one specified in Request For Comments (RFC) 822, “Standard for the Format of ARPA Internet Text Messages”, updating it to reflect current practice and incorporating incremental changes that were specified in other RFCs.
• RFC 1939 – Post Office Protocol – Version 3 - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1939.html
  Описание протокола приема сообщений POP3.
• RFC 2060 – Internet Message Access Protocol – Version 4rev1 - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2060.html
  Описание протокола IMAPrev4
• RFC 2076 – Common Internet Message Headers - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2076.html
  This memo contains a table of commonly occurring headers in headings of e-mail messages. The document compiles information from other RFCs such as RFC 822, RFC 1036, RFC 1123, RFC 1327, RFC 1496, RFC 1521, RFC 1766, RFC 1806, RFC 1864 and RFC 1911. A few commonly occurring headers which are not defined in RFCs are also included. For each header, the memo gives a short description and a reference to the RFC in which the header is defined.
• RFC 1521 – MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) Part One: Mechanisms for Specifying and Describing the Format of Internet Message Bodies - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1521.html – на английском
  http://egor.spb.ru/doc/mail/rfc1521.html – неполный русский перевод The Content-Type, Content-Transfer-Encoding Header Fields.
  The Quoted-Printable and Base 64 Content-Transfer-Encoding.
  The Predefined Content-Type Values.
• RFC 2045 – Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2045.html
  A MIME-Version header field.
  A Content-Type header field, generalized from RFC 1049, which can be used to specify the media type and subtype of data in the body of a message and to fully specify the native representation (canonical form) of such data.
  A Content-Transfer-Encoding header field, which can be used to specify both the encoding transformation that was applied to the body and the domain of the result.
  Two additional header fields that can be used to further describe the data in a body, the Content-ID and Content-Description header fields.
• RFC 2047 – MIME Part Three: Message Header Extensions for Non-ASCII Text - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2047.html
  RFC 2045 describes a mechanism for denoting textual body parts which are coded in various character sets, as well as methods for encoding such body parts as sequences of printable US-ASCII characters. This memo describes similar techniques to allow the encoding of non-ASCII text in various portions of a RFC 822 [2] message header, in a manner which is unlikely to confuse existing message handling software.
• RFC 2049 – MIME Part Five: Conformance Criteria and Examples - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2049.html
  This document describes what portions of MIME must be supported by a conformant MIME implementation. It also describes various pitfalls of contemporary messaging systems as well as the canonical encoding model MIME is based on.
• RFC 2231 – MIME Parameter Value and Encoded Word Extensions: Character Sets, Languages, and Continuations - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2231.html
  This memo defines extensions to the RFC 2045 media type and RFC 2183 disposition parameter value mechanisms to provide (1) a means to specify parameter values in character sets other than US-ASCII, (2) to specify the language to be used should the value be displayed, and (3) a continuation mechanism for long parameter values to avoid problems with header line wrapping.
• RFC 4096 – Policy-Mandated Labels Such as “Adv:" in Email Subject Headers Considered Ineffective At Best - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc4096.html
  This memo discusses policies that require certain labels to be inserted in the “Subject:" header of a mail message. Such policies are difficult to specify accurately while remaining compliant with key RFCs and are likely to be ineffective at best. This memo discusses an alternate, standards-compliant approach that is significantly simpler to specify and is somewhat less likely to be ineffective.