On Sun, 2008-08-10, Pete Resnick wrote:
> Your claims about 5xz return codes in 4.2.5 of 2821bis bring up an > interesting interpretation. 4.2.5 also says: > When an SMTP server returns a positive completion status (2yz code) > after the DATA command is completed with <CRLF>.<CRLF>, it accepts > responsibility for: > o delivering the message (if the recipient mailbox exists) , or Note the use of the singular here: "the recipient mailbox". This could be an example of imprecise wording surrounding the handling of multi-recipient messages or perhaps an implied "FORALL Recipients...". I have been bothered by this imprecision since I first read 821, but I assumed that the concensus had been that common sense would discover the "obvious intent". > o if attempts to deliver the message fail due to transient > conditions, retrying delivery some reasonable number of times at > intervals as specified in Section 4.5.4. > o if attempts to deliver the message fail due to permanent > conditions, or if repeated attempts to deliver the message fail > due to transient conditions, returning appropriate notification to > the sender of the original message (using the address in the SMTP > MAIL command). > Take the following example: > S: 220 foo.com Simple Mail Transfer Service Ready > C: EHLO bar.com > S: 250-foo.com greets bar.com > S: 250-VRFY > S: 250 HELP > C: VRFY [EMAIL PROTECTED] > S: 250 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > C: MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > S: 250 OK > C: VRFY [EMAIL PROTECTED] > S: 250 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > C: RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > S: 450 Can't send to him right now > C: DATA > S: 354 Start mail input; end with <CRLF>.<CRLF> > C: Blah blah blah... > C: ...etc. etc. etc. > C: . > S: 250 OK > C: QUIT > S: 221 foo.com Service closing transmission channel > According to 4.2.5 above, since [EMAIL PROTECTED] exists, and foo.com > (the server) has sent back a 250 to the DATA command, foo.com (the > server) now has responsibility for delivering the message to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (retrying if necessary) and bar.com (the client) SHOULD > NOT attempt to retry delivery to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is this the correct > interpretation? I believe that, not withstanding the VRFY, the "450 Can't send to him right now" means that Jones is NOT a recipient of the message in THIS transaction. Thus, the server should probably have responded to "DATA" with "554 No recipients given" -- Bill McQuillan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
