To: djb@koobera.math.uic.edu (D. J. Bernstein)
cc: drums@cs.utk.edu
Subject: Re: proposed agenda for 8 March WG meeting 
In-reply-to: Your message of "05 Mar 1996 04:40:54 GMT."
             <19960305044054.3652.qmail@koobera.math.uic.edu> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 1996 22:07:16 -0800
From: michael.derrico@software.com (Michael D'Errico)
Message-ID: <19960305060717.AAA17186@rome.software.com>

> I see that you have uncritically adopted RFC 1123's incorrect
> ``efficiency feature'' language. Multiple RCPTs are a _slowness_
> feature. Except in extreme circumstances, good MTAs can achieve much
> lower latency with separate SMTP connections than with multiple RCPTs.

Are you suggesting that the optimal server behavior is:

   foreach recipient in list
   {
      [connect];
      EHLO; MAIL; RCPT; DATA; QUIT;
      [disconnect]
   }

That's ridiculous.

> (This changes in the presence of pipelining, but I'm talking about the
> real world.)

Even without PIPELINING, you're wrong.

Mike