[Top] [All Lists]

Re: retry=delay

2011-10-24 20:27:22

Claus Assmann wrote:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011, Hector wrote:

- A consideration to simplify Servers implementation of the
retry=time tag where the server blocking time is already known in
seconds and would be an easier text response change is replace the
text word to "retry=seconds" compared to calculated the time in a
HH:MM:SS format.

- Do we need that kind of granularity?
- What's the purpose of providing all those alternatives:
  select one format and be done with it, everything else
  just adds sources of potential errors without any real gain.

Use just seconds or just minutes.  IMHO minutes are good enough for
this purpose.

I agree sticking to 1 syntax is probably best with less concerns and offers better endorsement value.

I am opening up the idea that for maybe better adoption by existing GL servers who already have time hints in their responses and using a I/O print format such as:

  Send("451 Greylisted, please try again in %d seconds\r\n",

would only need to change the text:

  Send("451 Greylisted, please try again. retry=%d\r\n",

which more than likely, the text is pulled from a separate language resource file. So the proposed change here is very minimal and would not require code image changes.

But I agree, along with others who voiced the same concern, keep it simple and less prune to parsing errors will help endorsement.

I'm just pointing out how in supporting other syntax can minimize the change needs to text response resource file that is separate from the code. This is something operators can do and do need to wait for SMTP developers and/or Greylisting ACL, SHIMS or hooks developers to catch up.

Whatever people think is best for endorsement. I'm open. My specific implementation and parser will support the existing formats as well to increase the effectiveness with existing GL servers - this has already been shown to work very well.