> How does the way the 1st MX fails to accept the message affect the working
> of other MXes (in a general case)?
if the first MX allows a connection to port 25, there is an implied
assumption that there is a program listening on port 25 that speaks SMTP.
therefore, the sender should attempt delivery.
the connection is never disconnected "immediately." assuming the connection
succeeds it must stay connected for some minimum length of time. it could
drop after 1 second with no traffic, or the SMTP transaction could get
halfway done and then the connection times out. let's say you send EHLO,
MAIL FROM, RCPT TO, and all is well, and you start your DATA but you never
get an ok from the remote. does that mean you should fall back to the next
MX?
anyway, until an RFC or something clarifies exactly different situations
should be handled i don't think it's particularly worthwhile to pick on
qmail for 1) "not doing it like sendmail does," and 2) not handling a broken
configuration in the way the breakers expect it to. say what you will about
qmail, the DNS configuration IS broken (and no i don't care how many people
do it that way - "everyone speeds" but that doesn't make it legal). until
we can agree that, yes, someone was lazy and should fix the DNS first, i
don't see the point in changing qmail's behavior.
shag
=====
Judd Bourgeois | CNM Network +1 (805) 520-7170
Software Architect | 1900 Los Angeles Avenue, 2nd Floor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Simi Valley, CA 93065
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
