On Fri, 22 May 1998, Philip Hazel wrote:
> On Fri, 22 May 1998, Chris Faehl wrote:
>
> > Here's precisely the transaction I sent that was accepted - it looks to
> > me like things worked in precisely the same way exim did:
>
> Looks like it to me too. We have to find out why the far end didn't like
> the Exim transaction.
just a thought... could it be something like the way CC Mail's protocol stack
was broken, with fragmentation of the lines of text across multiple writes?
the original problem : CC Mail sends "helo", and Exim makes up the "HELO" on
the fly, with multiple write()s, but CCMail only does one blocking read()
could this be a similar problem?
Paul
----
P Mansfield, Senior SysAdmin PSINet, +44-1223-577577x2611/577611 fax:577600
*** If a grand piano had a rubout key, I'd be a concert pianist by now! ***
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
