<ned+ietf-smtp(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com> wrote:
As with temporary error status codes, the SMTP client retains
responsibility for the message, but SHOULD not again attempt
I note in passing that "SHOULD not" is bad standards-speak and
needs to be corrected to "SHOULD NOT". Otherwise this is fine.
That's another call for "please fix the NOT":
<http://article.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.smtp/7481/match=auth48>
I'm not sure how "fine" it is, Hector's and your (among others)
interpretations are clearly different. Maybe it is irrelevant,
Hector's interpretation only misses an opportunity to "retry".
Where KISS (his 3*3 table) and "the mail must flow" principles
conflict I'd bet that Hector would prefer "the mail must flow",
but this could mean "change critical code at its core".
Frank