At 09:51 03-12-2008, Jose-Marcio Martins da Cruz wrote:
That's what I want to avoid : "accept and forward", mainly the "accept" part.
You could use the 551 reply code then. The message gets rejected and
a notification gets sent back to the MUA. Currently, MUAs treat that
as a delivery failure and don't take any specific action.
The idea is why, in this case, SMTP can't work the same way as HTTP
? The goal is, if wanted, be able to not work in "store and forward"
mode or ("hop by hop", as you say).
If you think of HTTP, the user agent gets the redirect code and a
link to the new resource and generates another request. MUAs act
more like dumb agents and don't have such a functionality.
We usually have two endpoints for communication. When we send a
"message", the receiver needs to acknowledge receipt or else provide
some type of signalling to detect failure. If we want to avoid
storage or hop by hop, we'll need some signalling between the two
ends. It's easier to design a new system than to put all that in
SMTP. The idea brings us to direct connection mode which we see in
the HTTP model. In the SMTP model, the idea is to produce (and
deliver) a message whereas in HTTP, it's about consuming a resource.
Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg