On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:38:50 EST, Hector Santos said: > S: 421 5.5.2 Syntax error (command line too long)
This is a *clear* example of "put the crack pipe down and move away slowly, with your hands in sight" programming. Under what *conceivable* circumstances would a "syntax error" qualify for a 4xx return code, which would imply that re-trying the exact same command later would work? > So it doesn't matter any of the above or if a proxy or not. Obviously > some SMTP servers are not following the recommmendations. Obviously > some are buggy. It doen't matter of who was right or wrong. > > A clarification should be adjusted into NOOP statement to help future > and current implementations update their codes. One has to be careful here - adding "clarifications" just adds things for the crack programmers to totally misinterpret. Seriously - write up your proposed text, and then *carefully* read it while thinking "How can somebody who thinks syntax errors are 4xx screw this one up, when they intentionally *try* to do so?"
pgpNWNmo3n5qf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
