On 4/29/10 4:20 PM, "Peter Saint-Andre" <[email protected]> wrote:
> rfc3920bis says: > > If the initiating entity attempts a reasonable number of retries with > the same SASL mechanism and all attempts fail, it MAY fall back to > the next mechanism in its ordered list by sending a new <auth/> > request to the receiving entity. If there are no remaining > mechanisms in its list, the initiating entity SHOULD instead send an > <abort/> element to the receiving entity. Fine. Regardless, I have to insist the the final error that's shown to the users is some sort of bad username/password indication, rather than a socket error. It's causing me all kinds of support issues that the error can't be diagnosed by an end user. -- Joe Hildebrand
