From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/39977 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stainless Steel Rat Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: thoughts on spam Date: 04 Nov 2001 04:04:42 -0500 Organization: The Happy Fun Ball Brigade Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <87y9m9fs6b.fsf@squeaker.lickey.com> <87elo1exsd.fsf@squeaker.lickey.com> <20011102160930.CC3D1BD52@squeaker.lickey.com> <87wv192jzh.fsf_-_@mclinux.com> <861yjgbygz.fsf@duchess.twilley.org> <20011102235444.E9C73BD48@squeaker.lickey.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035175600 30807 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 04:46:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 04:46:40 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: (qmail 29647 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2001 09:05:32 -0000 Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu (mail@129.7.128.13) by mastaler.com with SMTP; 4 Nov 2001 09:05:32 -0000 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 160JDF-0007Nw-00; Sun, 04 Nov 2001 03:05:05 -0600 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Sun, 04 Nov 2001 03:04:44 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (qmailr@sclp3.sclp.com [209.196.61.66]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id DAA06796 for ; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 03:04:31 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (qmail 29639 invoked by alias); 4 Nov 2001 09:04:45 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 29634 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2001 09:04:44 -0000 Original-Received: from h0060978d8c91.ne.mediaone.net (HELO peorth.gweep.net) (jyioay@24.218.202.161) by gnus.org with SMTP; 4 Nov 2001 09:04:44 -0000 Original-Received: (from ratinox@localhost) by peorth.gweep.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id fA494gf05964; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 04:04:42 -0500 Original-To: "(ding)" X-Attribution: Rat In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 19 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:39977 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:39977 * "Jason R. Mastaler" on Sun, 04 Nov 2001 | Anyway, Postfix and Exim are reasonable Sendmail-alternatives as well. They are -not- reasonable for -all- cases. I have seen Postfix's parallelization totally cripple my network at work. As far as we could figure, Postfix did not ratchet down fast enough and the end result was a crashed firewall MTA and an unknown quantity of lost mail. We reset everything and Postfix did it again. I have little doubt that qmail would achieve the same results, only faster. Before you say anything like, "but, you can configure foo to do bar," no, we cannot. No matter what tweaking we might do there is always the slim possibility that Postfix will do that again. The only way we can guarantee that it will not happen is not to use Postfix at all. sendmail works. That made our choice of MTA a no-brainer. -- Rat \ Ingredients of Happy Fun Ball include an Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ unknown glowing substance which fell to PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ Earth, presumably from outer space.