On 11 Mar 2004 at 7:25, Nick Ragouzis wrote about
"RE: [Exim] Request for comment: cha":
| Just catching up on the list ...
|
| My own view is that this is an inappropriate change.
|
| The semantics of those headers belong to message transmission
| not queue management.
True. But the question is simply whether the Received: header should
reflect when the message transmission *started* (DATA) or when it
*ended* (<CRLF>.<CRLF>). Ended seems to make more sense logically,
because the message hasn't actually been received until then.
| In the service of the confused admin, I think it *would* be
| appropriate to add an additional log message in the case
| of (configurable? 10 minutes is ok with me) excessive queue
| write time.
Queue write time isn't really the issue, message reception time is.
Philip's proposal to log both start and end times does address the
problem that a single timestamp must misrepresent queue residence
time on one end or the other when transmission time is long.
- Fred
