ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last Call: SMTP Service Extension for Content Negotiation to Proposed Standard

2002-07-02 18:11:11
Our responses seem to have crossed...

> > 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.

You can avoid the need for additional round trips by batching all the
capabilities queries with the first RCPT TO. But this results in a rather sharp
rise in implementation complexity.

That's quite a bit of overhead, for something that frequently will have no
effect on the content being transferred.

Indeed. The average number of recipients for legitimate mail does tend to be
quite small, which implies we're optimizing the uncommon case here.

                                Ned



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