Re: [Exim] Two local_scan functions - request for comments.

Philip Hazel <ph10@???> writes:

> Indeed. Exim cannot know if its message has got back to the sending
> client. In fact, it never checks any writing to the TCP/IP socket -
> it detects errors when it fails to *read* from the client. In this
> endgame situation, if local_scan() says "ok", it takes
> responsibility for the message whatever happens about sending a
> response.

Philip, would it be reasonable to have a configurable timeout that, if
it is reached, causes the message not to be accepted with a 4xx
response?

Given that RFC1047 is 14 years old now one should probably not put too
much faith in the author's estimates regarding reasonable timeouts.
I'm not sure if there should be a timeout by default.

-Hilko

--
"Microsoft complaining about the source license used by Linux is like
the event horizon calling the kettle black." -- Seen on kuro5hin