RFC 1854: SMTP Service Extension for Command Pipelining
This RFC has been replaced. Do not implement against it for new work — it was formally obsoleted by RFC 2197.
Current document in this lineage: RFC 2920 — SMTP Service Extension for Command Pipelining
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This memo defines an extension to the SMTP service whereby a server can indicate the extent of its ability to accept multiple commands in a single TCP send operation. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC1854
- Published
- October 1995
- Authors
- N. Freed
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- app
- Pages
- 7
- Also known as
- —
- Obsoleted by:
- RFC 2197
Topics
Standards lineage
This document is one revision in a chain of 3 RFCs, each formally replacing the one before it.
- RFC 1854 (1995)
- RFC 2197 (1997)
- RFC 2920 (2000) ✓
Read the full history of SMTP Service Extension for Command Pipelining →
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 1870SMTP Service Extension for Message Size DeclarationCurrent
November 1995
- RFC 2821Simple Mail Transfer ProtocolObsoleted
April 2001
- RFC 3885SMTP Service Extension for Message TrackingCurrent
September 2004
- RFC 4141SMTP and MIME Extensions for Content ConversionCurrent
November 2005
- RFC 3461Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) Service Extension for Delivery Status Notifications (DSNs)Updated
January 2003
- RFC 3463Enhanced Mail System Status CodesUpdated
January 2003
- RFC 3848ESMTP and LMTP Transmission Types RegistrationCurrent
July 2004
- RFC 3865A No Soliciting Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) Service ExtensionCurrent
September 2004
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?