With all the recent discussion about aggregating RCPTs for the same MX,
I took a look at qmail's code.
It became clear quite fast that general aggregation was quite impossible
given the architecture.
What is feasible is this : for a given message, aggregate by
domain. I.e, a mail to
On Sun, Nov 14, 1999 at 01:08:20AM +0100, Florent Guillaume wrote:
> With all the recent discussion about aggregating RCPTs for the same MX,
> I took a look at qmail's code.
>
> It became clear quite fast that general aggregation was quite impossible
> given the architecture.
Note that this is d
On Sat, Nov 13, 1999 at 11:45:59PM -0600, Bruce Guenter wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 1999 at 01:08:20AM +0100, Florent Guillaume wrote:
> > With all the recent discussion about aggregating RCPTs for the same MX,
> > I took a look at qmail's code.
> >
> > It became clear quite fast that general aggre
>
> With all the recent discussion about aggregating RCPTs for the same MX,
> I took a look at qmail's code.
>
> It became clear quite fast that general aggregation was quite impossible
> given the architecture.
Especially since the it's quite possible for the same machine to exist in
the MX re
Sam writes:
> On Mon, 15 Nov 1999, Mark Evans wrote:
>
> > This assumes that the recieving MTA will process multiple RCPT messages
> > in exactly the same way as those with a single RCPT. e.g. the MTA might
> > impose progressive delays in the transaction for every RCPT given to it
> > or a
ally, batching multiple RCPTs for the same domain
> > > WAS the default behavior of all the MTAs on the Internet.
> >
> > And just exactly what evidence do you base this unfounded conclusion on?
>
> A little program called "sendmail". Perhaps you&#x
Joe Kelsey writes:
> In 1982 sendmail was by far and away in the *minority* of MTA's in
> operation on the Internet.
Hence the enshrinement of Tenex's CRLF in RFC821 instead of Unix's
newline (what a botch that was).
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells supp
On Sun, Nov 14, 1999 at 09:53:58PM +, Frederik Lindberg wrote:
> > > It became clear quite fast that general aggregation was quite impossible
> > > given the architecture.
> >
> > Note that this is due to the architecture of both qmail and SMTP. One
> > of the problems with aggregation when
t; > > > > same domain WAS the default behavior of all the MTAs on the
> > > > > Internet.
> > > >
> > > > And just exactly what evidence do you base this unfounded
> > > > conclusion on?
> > >
> > >
