Le samedi 26 fÃvrier 2005 Ã 09:05 -0800, Kenneth Porter a Ãcrit : >--On Thursday, February 24, 2005 4:35 PM -0500 "Chuck R. Anderson" ><cra@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> In my environment, on 99% of all systems, I've never needed anything >> but a simple queue-to-smarthost mail sending daemon, with no receive >> functionality at all. Therefore, I don't care which mail daemon is >> included, as long as it can do that and supports some type of >> /etc/aliases file. I'd actually prefer to see a simple ssmtp-like >> program, but ssmtp doesn't meet those needs (it doesn't queue, doesn't >> expand local aliases). > >I can understand queuing, in case the real server is down. That can be the >simple-minded queuing implemented by most MUA's. But why aliases? Shouldn't >those also be handled by the real server? You can always get by with your provider if you pay more. Often you have to play tricks when you only have a basic residential access. In my case that means real queues + aliases + address rewriting + sasl auth + use of port 24 not 25. I'd be surprised if I where alone in this case. To fight spamming and worms ISP put in place all sorts of creative annoyances that mean you really need a smart MTA if you don't want to be reduced to webmail. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
