On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, Devin Carraway wrote: > > Since we don't claim to support pipelining (rfc 2920) anyway, you > > could do a hack to flush the input buffer when there's an SMTP > > failure. That should ruin their session pretty efficiently. :-) > > We don't? The PIPELINING keyword is listed in the EHLO response, and > I've seen pipelined transfers going through just fine.
eh, ... It will be really hard to sell you that bridge now, huh? The more correct variation would be to say that you could nuke PIPELINING from the EHLO and then do as I suggested. :-) Actually, I just thought of a case where we might be broken with regards to PIPELINING. Do we have to deal with a DATA segment even if we reject it? (A client doing as you describe; if we give a 5xx code, is it our responsibility to not interpret their DATA part as commands). That should be checked with the RFC. :-/ - ask -- ask bjoern hansen, http://ask.netcetera.dk/ !try; do();
