On 6 Mar 2014, at 19:50, Paul Smith <paul(_at_)pscs(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk> wrote:
On 06/03/2014 18:09, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
There is a final option: reject the message outright at SMTP time, but
deliver it to the person that accepted it normally.
I'd never even thought of that... Yeuch. I'd have thought that would be
'illegal' in SMTP.
Well it's not a nice option, but you could make it less awful by just
explaining what it means in the message text (which you'll be lucky if the user
sees, to judge from the behaviour of some stupid MTAs).
PRDR is great in theory, but I'm afraid it's doomed by sheer lack of
I think it's doomed by there not being a 'good' fallback solution. This would
be especially a problem when its functionality would virtually never be
available. If it became more common, so the fallback is the exception rather
than the rule, then it would be less of a problem.
Yes, this is what I was really trying to say. The functionality of PRDR
depends so critically on everyone else having it that it's basically impossible
to justify implementation without everybody else on board. Think of it as the
IPv6 of SMTP extensions, if you like. :)
I think it's a shame that LMTP left SMTP behind in this regard. It never
seemed to bother people then. Ironically LMTP is now more "In vogue" than ever
(many LDA now support it natively, or can be patched to do it) so an obvious
implementation choice for PRDR would simply be in translating LMTP into PRDR.
ietf-smtp mailing list