Charles Cazabon writes:
> Good clarification. Would you settle for "Making VERP work with per-MX
> batched recipients of a message would require extensive core changes to
> qmail?"
No. VERP support has little to do with it. The problem is that
qmail-send / qmail-rspawn are strongly oriented around one recipient
per invocation of qmail-remote. VERP just makes it slightly more
complicated. qmail-send and qmail-rspawn could offer qmail-remote a
list of recipients for the same message at the same host[1], and
qmuail-remote could decide if VERP support from the SMTP client was
needed. If it wasn't present then qmail-remote could *still* re-use
the TCP connection. Given the state of the art in TCP/IP stacks, this
would be a good thing because TCP retry timers are not shared between
TCP sessions.
[1] I'm not talking about per-MX, but instead per-host. Collating
by MX entry means a gratuitious MX lookup (admittedly, probably
cached). Instead, I'm just talking about a textual comparison between
hostnames.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok |
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | John Hartford, RIP
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX |
