RFC 1651: SMTP Service Extensions
This RFC has been replaced. Do not implement against it for new work — it was formally obsoleted by RFC 1869.
Current document in this lineage: RFC 5321 — Simple Mail Transfer Protocol
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This memo defines a framework for extending the SMTP service by defining a means whereby a server SMTP can inform a client SMTP as to the service extensions it supports. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC1651
- Published
- July 1994
- Authors
- J. Klensin; N. Freed; M. Rose; E. Stefferud; D. Crocker
- Status
- DRAFT STANDARD
- Stream
- Legacy
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 11
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Standards lineage
This document is one revision in a chain of 10 RFCs, each formally replacing the one before it.
Referenced by
One later RFC formally updates or obsoletes part of this document.
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 1652SMTP Service Extension for 8bit-MIMEtransportObsoleted
July 1994
- RFC 1985SMTP Service Extension for Remote Message Queue StartingCurrent
August 1996
- RFC 2033Local Mail Transfer ProtocolCurrent
October 1996
- RFC 2034SMTP Service Extension for Returning Enhanced Error CodesCurrent
October 1996
- RFC 2197SMTP Service Extension for Command PipeliningObsoleted
September 1997
- RFC 2442The Batch SMTP Media TypeCurrent
November 1998
- RFC 2487SMTP Service Extension for Secure SMTP over TLSObsoleted
January 1999
- RFC 2505Anti-Spam Recommendations for SMTP MTAsCurrent
February 1999
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?