On Oct 29, 2009, at 9:11 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote: I'm guessing the incentive for all of this is to reduce bandwidth, otherwise why not just issue the 4XX/5XX after the DATA/. sequence rather than invent a new mechanism to issue the same response at the envelope end of the transaction?
> First blank line after DATA. > If the proposal is an attempt to reduce SMTP bandwidth, which is becoming a vanishingly small part of Internet traffic for most sites anyway, then stopping after DATA doesn't help as your OS will have likely received a socket buffer full of data, even if the application doesn't read it. So it might make you feel good, but it doesn't reduce the bytes coming down the line consequentially. Mark. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
