John White wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2000 at 10:30:41AM -0400, Mark Mentovai wrote:
> > That's very easy on a host-by-host basis, and I use it for certain setups.
> > The problem is that there shouldn't be any "domain in question," an MTA
> > should make efficient use of a limited number of SMTP sessions when
> > transferring mail to any other MTA.
>
> I'm not trying to be too much of a smartass here, but you're
> projecting your ideas about nice network usage onto the
> smtp protocol, which doesn't demand it.
And DJB has already proposed other protocol solutions that don't handle this
issue either. That said, your comment is moot. SMTP has lots of problems, why
_not_ solve them?
> How is this accumulation supposed to occur? Per queue injection?
> Over a time period? How long of a time period? As long as we're
> being good neighbors, should the mta lookup the mx for each
> recipient and accumulate by mx? What should we do if the dns
> gives us a 0 ttl for the mx?
Accumulation as long as a connection is open to the foreign MTA. That was easy.
> While you ponder the answer to those questions, qmail will have
> delivered the mail.
Or crashed a mailserver.
