--On 20 January 2011 22:07:33 -0800 Claus Assmann <exim@???> wrote:
>
>> Don't hold your breath while waiting...
>
> I don't need too, I already implemented it in one MTA, and if I
> had the time, I could put it into another "main stream" MTA.
Given that Exim has significant market share, I for one would welcome that
feature. Which MTA is it that implements the feature?
<
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200912/mxsurvey.html>
An alternative to implementing PRDR would be to use an SMTP verb that
changes the session to an LMTP session. I'd use "LMTP" as the verb. That
would permit better code reuse, and would avoid the need for administrators
to learn the differences between LMTP and PRDR (PRDR adds a "final response
code", which seems redundant to me). Otherwise, it's pretty similar.
--
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/
