Author: Jeremy Harris Date: To: exim-dev Subject: Re: [exim-dev] delivery event for retry timeout
On 21/02/18 06:47, Jasen Betts via Exim-dev wrote: >> Why not just "msg:rcpt:timeout" ? What distinction were
>> you implying?
> That suggests to me a TCP or SMTP timeout which will normally
> be retried. retry timeout exceeded is permanent. maybe
> "msg:rcpt:expired" is better?
> Do you want me to write up a patch and submit it to the bug tracker.
> I guess I should because that way I can include updates to the
Yes please. On the name, my arguments would be that a TCP-level
timeout would have a name starting "tcp" (we already have tcp:connect
and tcp:close)... but it doesn't matter too much. Your original
is fine (and leaves other possibilities open).
This message was posted to the following mailing lists: