Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail,comp.mail.smail,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.Hawaii.Edu!news.lava.net!news-w.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!news.mci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.mindspring.com!mindspring!uunet!in1.uu.net!208.192.224.3!news.interactive.net!bet From: bet@interactive.net (Bennett Todd) Subject: Re: Sendmail vs. Smail... X-Newsreader: slrn (0.9.1.1 BETA UNIX) X-Nntp-Posting-User: bet Sender: news@news.interactive.net (USENET News) Organization: IBS Interactive Message-ID: <slrn5b05ds.6k.bet@onyx.interactive.net> References: <57tf61$gq7@raven.eva.net> <58h6r1$8ik@ezekiel.eunet.ie> <1996Dec1005.15.53.2968@koobera.math.uic.edu> <58mchc$d6o@ezekiel.eunet.ie> <1996Dec1121.15.26.13717@koobera.math.uic.edu> <58ntsj$t67@telesys.tnet.com> X-Trace: 850400700/10112 X-Nntp-Posting-Host: onyx.interactive.net Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 14:25:01 GMT Lines: 34 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.mail.sendmail:35094 comp.mail.smail:2695 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:32480 On 11 Dec 1996 20:24:03 -0700, Kevin W. Reed <kreed@tnet.com> wrote: >djb@koobera.math.uic.edu (D. J. Bernstein) writes: >>What percentage of your mail volume consists of messages with 10 >>recipients on the same system? > >Obviously you have never run a large mailing list. On our systems with >Mailing lists on them, a large percentage do. Starting a sentence off with "Obviously" doesn't make it true. Show some evidence. Document an example where qmail's strategy will load a network link more heavily than your favourite. Or a case where qmail will take longer to get the traffic through. Please --- if you can produce such an example, do lob some facts into this fantasizing. As it stands, Dan has repeatedly cited quantitative measurements, and people disagreeing with him are sticking to their principles, and apparently unconcerned about facts. Prove him wrong. >Qmail doesn't support UUCP Bang paths as well which a site that supports >those types of connections requires. UUCP email transport has supported domain names properly since the mid-80s sometime (when did pathalias start working really properly?). A strict "!" path is not a useable address in most circumstances; the name at the front of the path is a relative UUCP name, not guaranteed unique. However, hybrid names of the form host!host!...!user@domain.name should work fine --- and be supported by qmail --- even though they are fragile and poor. Far better for a UUCP-connected site to get a couple of pathalias-running forwarders to list them with MX records. The point: if you want to make supporting ! paths a requirement, well hell, have a fun time, it's your computer. But don't expect the rest of us to do anything more than laugh; that makes about as much sense as making a requirement of supporting x.400, or Lotus Notes, or JES2/HASP. Such protocols may make sense in particular ghettoes, but support for them has no place in an internet MTA; it urgently needs to be localized in a gateway. -Bennett