[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Mail Data termination

2011-08-21 16:12:40

John C Klensin wrote:

This is _not_ a standards problem, at least IMO.

I guess the point is the CS holding time is "unnatural" from a receiver point of view and if the insight was available long ago, I believe it would have changes a quite few things, including a consideration in receiver loading limits to take into account that capacity limits cause by caused by the increase use of CS clients deliberated slowing down the receivers.

If RFC5322 stated:

A 5 minute idle time is required after a transaction was complete in order
     to allow the sender the opportunity to start a new transaction.

Then we have a different story because now both client and server designers are in sync with SMTP client/server high scale throughput modeling.

But it doesn't not say that. It does say to allow for new transaction but I don't think most presumed that a client will deliberate wait X time at this point because of their (client side) queuing problem is easily solved with other client-side only solutions with the same end result without impacting SMTP server designs or causing any new SMTP implementation considerations, including considerations that further goes against its recommendations.

For example, I already added an operator option to lower the Idle Time after the first transaction is completed to a default 1 minute.

It changes the design picture when the discovery of client with CS behavior is highlighted.

While I don't think this warrant any immediate concern, the day 5321bis does opens up, I think you should be ready for discussion regarding timeouts among other related things regarding multi-transaction sections. :)


Hector Santos

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