[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Question related to draft-hansen-4468upd-mailesc-registry-02.txt and RFC3463

2007-08-07 02:22:01

ned+ietf-smtp(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com wrote:

On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 07:25:14PM -0400, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Saturday, 04 August, 2007 19:09 -0400 Jeff Macdonald
<jmacdonald(_at_)e-dialog(_dot_)com> wrote:
and existing client implementations to adapt to the new sub series.
I'm not aware of any MTAs that pay attention to extended SMTP codes.
Could you supply some examples?
The MTA I work on (PMDF/SJSMS) has had code to process enhanced status codes in
place for almost a decade. This includes looking at the second and third value
of the status code, althogh to be fair this is only done when gatewaying to
non-SMTP environments. In the SMTP-only world the code is extracted from
responses and copied into DSNs and whatnot, but I don't believe the second and
third values actually control MTA behavior in any way.

I'm fairly confident at least PP does similar things as well - it would have to
in order to  support X.400 gatewaying if nothing else.
In fact PP translate every SMTP error code to enhanced status code internally.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>