For the traffic between domains, single-hop is considerable. But for
the traffic within the domain (i.e. what is MX to mailbox today), you
can't assume every mailbox to be online all the time.
Fully agree. I didn't get to that point until the end of the message,
but I can see from other responses that people missed it. Let me try
again:
The mail-ng transport protocol should be designed to only know about a
single hop, from sender to recipient. The sender may have multiple hops
to a designated transport agent, and the receiving transport agent may
have multiple hops to a mailstore, but the transport protocol should not
make any accommodation for these additional hops other than to allow
them to add metadata to the transit stream. These requirements are to
make the protocol more sensible and to limit the responsibility of
operators to just what they control.
Hmm. Do you mind trying one more time? I'm still not sure I'm getting
this...
Is the point that in a "single hop" world, the receiving system can be
expected to know a lot more about the recipient than the ability to
perform a routing decision? (oh...and the sending system would know more
about the sender)
Or is there more to it than that?
jb