[ On Fri, April 18, 1997 at 15:28:13 (+0100), Nigel Metheringham wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: "ESMTP" in banner?
>
> That seems sensible. However didn't one person find a patholgical case
> where this didn't work - presumably in a case where the implementor never
> thought to handle multiline responses!
Could be, but that would be one protocol violation I'd not want to work
around. You can only go so far! ;-)
I'm nearly siding with Alan on this issue... but I'm not going to do
any more than talk about it in smail's case. If the sender suffers
because his mailer can't recognize ESMTP support then the pressure
should be to fix his mailer, not to change smail's banner.
> I thought there was some code added in at one point which if a connection
> was closed on receipt of EHLO it immediately retried with HELO. This was
> to cope with a mailer from a company with a certain New York Times
> columnist as CEO.
Yes, there is! I hadn't really noticed that before. I'd also not
really noticed that HAVE_EHLO only turns off the initial EHLO, and
doesn't disable any ESMTP support. It makes me want to rip out the
ifdefs and not even bother supporting an initial HELO any more.
Unfortunately even this fix didn't help appease one of the gateways we
ran across lately (maybe the older Lotus one). My guess is nothing
would, though I didn't try dickering with it directly to see.
> [2 bombs exploded and one more found near here so far today - so you can
> guess whats happened if I stop typing in mid-senta
Oh oh!
[[ Sometimes I'm glad I live in Canada were we get really upset if biker
gangs in far away provinces blow each other's club-houses up (though
there's still the chance a little old lady walking down the street will
suffer side-effects). ]]
--
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 443-1734 VE3TCP robohack!woods
Planix, Inc. <woods@???>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@???>
