John Robinson wrote:
> On 07/11/2006 02:42, W B Hacker wrote:
>> Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
>>> At 2006-11-07 09:52:07 +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>> The intent is to determine experimentally, the 'real', not
>>>> theoretical, response of a submitting client [1], if/as/when the
>>>> server with which it has estabished a connection were to issue a
>>>> 'RSET'. More accurately, an unexpected RSET.
>>> A server can't issue RSET, so your question is meaningless.
>> A 'server' - or client - can do whatever it is programmed to do.
>
> Yes, but an SMTP sender ("client") issues commands like RSET, and an
> SMTP receiver ("server") issues responses which begin with status codes,
> so your server cannot issue RSET, or at least not without totally
> disregarding the SMTP RFCs, rendering your question meaningless.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John.
>
Not clear to me why one would expect RFC compliance *from* spambots, nor owe
RFC-compliance *to* spambots. Mynheer Venema put it rather more succinctly.
But but never mind - that wasn't the question.
Seems the mechanism is not there now, and any such test would require coding.
Bill
--
## 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/
