Dave Cridland wrote:
> On Thu Dec 13 16:51:35 2007, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

>> 4. would return an error to the sender (e.g., <recipient-unavailable/>)
>>
>>
> But won't this mean, effectively, that messages and/or data are lost? In
> this case, I'm assuming Donald is legitmate - if Donald is deliberately
> throttling his c2s link, in order to create a DoS, then we don't care,
> of course.
> 
> What we want to do here - I think - is throttle the sender, and only
> start to reject stanzas if the throttling is ignored. (Perhaps because
> it's unsupported).

If Donald has so little bandwidth available, why is he engaging in large
data transfers?

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Reply via email to