Re: RFC: Making mail-transport-agent Priority: optional
On 2011-10-15, Josh Triplett <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> MTAs would need to advance quite a bit to get anywhere near as usable as
> a MUA that speaks SMTP, not least of which in error reporting. (Most of
> the people I know who run local MTAs have had at least one "all my mail
> got stuck in a queue for one or more weeks" story.)
Erhm, did you ever encounter a 5xx SMTP error message with, say, Icedove?
You don't want to be in that situation, really. You want the MTA to accept
everything from the client and sending him a bounce to his mailbox because the
applications don't cope with it in a sane way neither.
(For the latter a little GUI tool would do. Something like , which only
supports Exim, though.)