On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 9:54 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bernd Fondermann ha scritto: > > On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
<snip> > > > #9 these fields only seem to be used when logging exceptions. reverse > > > DNS lookups have a tendency to be expensive and will often not produce > > > any useful information. this cost is paid every time that a connection > > > is started. is this worthwhile? > > > > > > > AFAIK, dnsServer uses a cache - but the question remains valid. > > probably, in the end, it is worthwhile - even indespensible - in > > certain failure situations. ;-) > > > > Some handler might require checks on the remote hostname. Mailets have > access to the remote hostname, too. I guess lazy "resolving" is not an > option because it will happen almost always (I've not checked the code, but > this is my feeling about this). yes, some handlers may need this information but at least one (IMAP) does not. if the IP is stored, why isn't lazy resolution an option on a per protocol basis? - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
