Re: [exim] Re: SMTP protocol violation (3ware raid controlle…

Pàgina inicial
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Autor: Jakob Hirsch
Data:  
A: Alan J. Flavell
CC: Exim users list
Assumpte: Re: [exim] Re: SMTP protocol violation (3ware raid controllermailingto exim 4.44)
Alan J. Flavell wrote:

>>There has been much discussion about the meanings of SHOULD, MUST etc.,
> Ehrlich? I thought there was an RFC about it!


Ja, wirklich. It's RFC2119, AFAIK.

>>there is even a RFC about it.
> So why the discussion?


Maybe because people used to discuss before March 1997, when RFC2119 was
published. And even after that date, people discuss about RFCs. Weird,
I know.

>>Ok, it's not strictly a protocol violation.
> Right. On the other hand, nobody is compelled to accept a mail if
> their policy rules are against it.


Right. If I'd like to accept mail on a random basis it's my own business.

But OTOH, rfc2821 also says:

    The SMTP protocol allows a server to formally reject a transaction
    while still allowing the initial connection as follows: a 554
    response MAY be given in the initial connection opening message
    instead of the 220.  A server taking this approach MUST still wait
    for the client to send a QUIT (see section 4.1.1.10) before closing
    the connection and SHOULD respond to any intervening commands with


So, by closing the connection after sending 554 Exim violates the
protocol. But, to be honest, I don't give a damn about this.