On 4/29/10 4:26 PM, Joe Hildebrand wrote: > > On 4/29/10 4:20 PM, "Peter Saint-Andre" <stpe...@stpeter.im> wrote: > >> rfc3920bis says: >> >> If the initiating entity attempts a reasonable number of retries with >> the same SASL mechanism and all attempts fail, it MAY fall back to >> the next mechanism in its ordered list by sending a new <auth/> >> request to the receiving entity. If there are no remaining >> mechanisms in its list, the initiating entity SHOULD instead send an >> <abort/> element to the receiving entity. > > Fine. Regardless, I have to insist the the final error that's shown to the > users is some sort of bad username/password indication, rather than a socket > error. It's causing me all kinds of support issues that the error can't be > diagnosed by an end user.
+1 to that for sure.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
