Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?

ietf-asrg

Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?

2008-11-28 19:30:10

On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 6:12 PM, SM <sm(_at_)resistor(_dot_)net> wrote:

I do believe that a recipient
MX has enough information to make an accept/trylater/reject decision,
which is what SMTP requires it to do.


Could you point me to the relevant section of RFC 5321 which describes that
requirement?


that would be section 4.2.1.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
[Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, David Nicol Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, John Levine Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, Chris Lewis Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, David Nicol Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, Steve Atkins Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, David Nicol Message not available Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, SM Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, David Nicol <= Message not available Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, SM Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, Alessandro Vesely Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, SM Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, Alessandro Vesely Message not available Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, SM Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, Michael Thomas Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, David Nicol

Previous by Date:	Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, SM
Next by Date:	Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, SM
Previous by Thread:	Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, SM
Next by Thread:	Re: [Asrg] is SMTP still really store-and-forward ?, SM
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]