Mark Mentovai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If an MTA receives a message with 100 recipients with the same MX, > there is no reason to transfer the message to the remote mail > exchanger 100 times. Yes, there is: per-recipient VERPs. You may not see this as outweighing the bandwidth issue, but it's still a reason in favor of individual transfers, given the limits of SMTP. paul
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! Dave Sill
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Michael T. Babcock
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Mark Mentovai
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Dave Sill
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Paul Jarc
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Michael T. Babcock
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Dave Sill
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Michael T. Babcock
- Re: void main (no, not a long one) Petr Novotny
- Re: void main Jan Echternach
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! Paul Jarc
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! Frank Tegtmeyer
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! Michael T. Babcock
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! Paul Jarc
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! Peter van Dijk
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! Paul Jarc
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! Michael T. Babcock
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! Peter van Dijk
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! Paul Jarc
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! Dave Sill
- Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying! Michael T. Babcock
