|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
Subject: Re: smtpd_banner without ESMTP
From: Anand Buddhdev (arb
anand.org)Date: Tue Mar 07 2000 - 06:57:12 CST
- Next message: Alexey Lobanov: "Re: attached files and outlook"
- Previous message: Lutz Jaenicke: "Re: smtpd_banner without ESMTP"
- In reply to: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen: "Re: smtpd_banner without ESMTP"
- Next in thread: Lutz Jaenicke: "Re: smtpd_banner without ESMTP"
- Reply: Anand Buddhdev: "Re: smtpd_banner without ESMTP"
- Reply: Lutz Jaenicke: "Re: smtpd_banner without ESMTP"
- Reply: Brad Knowles: "Re: smtpd_banner without ESMTP"
- Reply: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen: "Re: smtpd_banner without ESMTP"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 01:18:33PM +0100, Rask Ingemann Lambertsen wrote:
> >> Has anybody experienced ill effects from removing the "ESMTP" part of
> >> smtpd_banner?
>
> > Why would you want to do so?
>
> To save 6 bytes of outgoing bandwidth for each SMTP connection we get?
Instead of taking out the ESMTP, why don't you remove the hostname. I
once setup an MTA to advertise
220 ESMTP
only. We still advertised ESMTP, but saved some bytes nevertheless. I
know the RFCs require the hostname to be present, but I never observed
any ill-effects of removing it.
-- See complete headers for more info
- Next message: Alexey Lobanov: "Re: attached files and outlook"
- Previous message: Lutz Jaenicke: "Re: smtpd_banner without ESMTP"
- In reply to: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen: "Re: smtpd_banner without ESMTP"
- Next in thread: Lutz Jaenicke: "Re: smtpd_banner without ESMTP"
- Reply: Anand Buddhdev: "Re: smtpd_banner without ESMTP"
- Reply: Lutz Jaenicke: "Re: smtpd_banner without ESMTP"
- Reply: Brad Knowles: "Re: smtpd_banner without ESMTP"
- Reply: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen: "Re: smtpd_banner without ESMTP"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]