On Tuesday 10 May 2005 15:34, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > In order to continue the discussions about the possible > > > > solutions for > > > > > this list I would like to know if you can provide more fast-failing > > > scenarios (probably due to SMTP extensions like AUTH, > > > > STARTTLS, etc). > > > > I believe that we should support fastfail for both STARTTLS and AUTH. > > Ok, but can you provide a real use case? What would you like to do > fast-failing there? > I mean that generic behaviours can be hardcoded, I want to know what kind > of fastfail you are imagining to be configurable for real.
The use case is indirectly, what I would like is to have forinstance DATA fastfail if STARTTLS/AUTH has not been executed. That allows us to only accept mail securely and/or from an authenticated source. So what is needed in this case is an internal state that a later command can check and fastfail upon. --Søren > > Stefano > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Søren Hilmer, M.Sc. R&D manager Phone: +45 72 30 64 00 TietoEnator IT+ A/S Fax: +45 72 30 64 02 Ved Lunden 12 Direct: +45 72 30 64 57 DK-8230 Åbyhøj Email: soren.hilmer <at> tietoenator.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
