> Is the assumption about James correct (that it cannot lose a mail > provided that the sender retries until success) ?
Not behaving this way would be a bug, and a bad one at that, but bad things happen. I guess you have to make a value judgement based upon the fact that james is designed to work as you have described, and by and large is seen to do so in practice. Any concrete guarantee of performance is not really possible. d. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
