At 07:49 PM 7/2/2002 -0400, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Tuesday, 02 July, 2002 15:33 -0600 Alexey Melnikov
<mel(_at_)MESSAGINGDIRECT(_dot_)COM> wrote:
> Correct me if
> I am wrong, but it seams that extending VRFY command is more
> appropriate for the purpose than using RCPT.
Hmm. _That_ is an interesting idea, since we have always
permitted VRFY to do somewhat more poking around in real time
than one might normally expect of RCPT (where "poking around"
efforts more often result in a 250 code and an email rejection
if needed).
If I understand both your comments and Keith's suggestion, the key is a
separate command.
It, too, find that aesthetically preferable. The problem is with efficiency.
A separate command means 2 commands per recipient and it means at least one
synchronization event, between issuance of this new command and issuance of
the first RCPT-TO.
That's quite a bit of overhead, for something that frequently will have no
effect on the content being transferred.
d/
----------
Dave Crocker <mailto:dave(_at_)tribalwise(_dot_)com>
TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850