On Wed, 11 Aug 2010, [email protected] wrote: > > > > "Long delays after the <CRLF>.<CRLF> is received can > > > result in timeouts and duplicate messages. Deferring > > > detailed message analysis until after the SMTP > > > connection has closed can result in non-delivery > > > notifications, possibly sent to incorrect addresses. A > > > receiver-SMTP MUST carefully balance these two > > > considerations, i.e., the time required to respond to > > > the final <CRLF>.<CRLF> end of data indicator and the > > > desirable goal of rejecting undeliverable or > > > unacceptable messages at SMTP time." > > > I like this text. I think it reflects current operational realities quite > > nicely. > > I agree. The only suggestion I have is that an informational referenece to > Craig Partridge's oringal document on the timeout issue might be helpful to > include after the first sentence.
Yes. Maybe also add to the second sentence a cross-reference to section 7.1 on spoofing? Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <[email protected]> http://dotat.at/ SOUTHEAST ICELAND: WESTERLY OR SOUTHWESTERLY 3 OR 4, INCREASING 5 IN WEST. SLIGHT, OCCASIONALLY MODERATE LATER. SHOWERS. GOOD.
