Is this another example of someone who can't tell the difference between
systematic cluster naming and dial-up ranges?
Tony.
--
<fanf@???> <dot@???>
http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n\$3\$2\$4}}\
\N}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n\$3\$2\$4}}
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:08:47 +0100
From: Mail Delivery System <Mailer-Daemon@???>
Reply-To: postmaster@???
To: fanf2@???
Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender
This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:
dlugo@???
SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT TO:<dlugo@???>:
host spot.etherboy.com [216.158.54.130]: 550 Bad name detected in HELO:
ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk
------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. ------
Return-path: <fanf2@???>
X-Cam-SpamDetails: Not scanned
X-Cam-AntiVirus: No virus found
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/
Received: from hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.54]:37196)
by ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.150]:25)
with esmtpa (EXTERNAL:fanf2) id 1G7d7m-0004uy-23 (Exim 4.54)
(return-path <fanf2@???>); Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:08:22 +0100
Received: from fanf2 (helo=localhost) by hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk (hermes.cam.ac.uk)
with local-esmtp id 1G7d7m-0001Ol-4j (Exim 4.54)
(return-path <fanf2@???>); Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:08:22 +0100
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:08:22 +0100
From: Tony Finch <dot@???>
X-X-Sender: fanf2@???
Reply-To: exim-users@???
To: Dave Lugo <dlugo@???>
cc: exim-users@???
Subject: Re: [exim] using readsocket question
In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSX.4.58.0607311451350.393@???>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607312006291.2500@???>
References: <Pine.OSX.4.58.0607311451350.393@???>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: Tony Finch <fanf2@???>
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Dave Lugo wrote:
>
> I'm trying to use dccifd directly with exim, using readsocket,
> but not having much luck. It invariably fails with a timeout.
> My question relates to how readsocket does its thing. The
> dccifd man page reads:
>
> "...The end of the body of the mail message is signaled by the
> MTA half-closing the connection..."
>
> Is that the same behavior that's described thusly in spec.txt?
No, Exim assumes that the request string is self-delimiting so that the
other end of the socket can tell when it has finished.
Tony.
--
<fanf@???> <dot@???>
http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n\$3\$2\$4}}\
\N}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n\$3\$2\$4}}
