Joe Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Rian Hunter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> I think this requires some more thought considering different >> smtp connections and server requirements. The main drawback to >> sub- requesting each rcpt to is that we have two different >> handlers trying to read data from the socket. Is this problem >> solved by spooling the data, and letting the two separate >> requests read from the spool bucket? > > Hmm, what would the smtp return status for DATA be, > if only some of the RCPT_TO addresses are handled > successfully? > > I've been assuming the http analog of "RCPT_TO: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" > was "POST: /foo\nHost: bar" but I now think that's wrong > from a resource identifier standpoint.
OTOH, maybe we should just return success in this case, and only retry/bounce the failed subrequests later on. -- Joe Schaefer
