Claus Assmann wrote: > ..[snip]... > > I'm not questioning that. It's maybe just a bit "nit picking": the error > message is misleading as it is not a _violation_ of RFC 2821.
How is it "nit picking" or misleading? The nature of the SMTP client is to connect to the server, and then see if that connection is either accepted or rejected. It is a very poorly designed client that just assumes once a connection channel has not timed out, that that means the connection has been accepted. This is perhaps more my interpretation than anything else, but to me, even when pipelinging is used, the initial connection and response to that connection are required stop points. Besides, as one person pointed out in another message of this thread, SMTP is a lock-step process, and can only be otherwise when both ends of the connection agree that it is not. So, how can a client decide to not wait for a response when there has not even been a chance to negotiate a change in the lock-step process? -- --EAL-- -- -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
