On Thu, 25 Apr 2002, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> They don't seem to care much about the behaviour after a 4xx response to
> STARTTLS either, so I'll quote RFC 3207 in a last attempt to try to elicit a
> response before I go back to lurking...
>
> If the client receives the 454 response, the client must decide
> whether or not to continue the SMTP session. Such a decision is
> based on local policy. For instance, if TLS was being used for
> client authentication, the client might try to continue the session,
> in case the server allows it even with no authentication. However,
> if TLS was being negotiated for encryption, a client that gets a 454
> response needs to decide whether to send the message anyway with no
> TLS encryption, whether to wait and try again later, or whether to
> give up and notify the sender of the error.
Yes, I saw that (having now discovered 3207; thanks for drawing it to my
attention). As I try to be relatively neutral in these kinds of
situation (imposing my preferences only in the defaults), this does
support the case for an option (which is now on the Wish List).
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
