John,
On 2006-06-05 12:16 -0400 John Peacock (jpeacock@rowman.com) wrote:
Matthias Andree wrote:
Because that's the only thing the decrepit qmail handles. Any modern MTA has evolved quite far from that point. No matter if you prefer Postfix, Exim, Courier, Sendmail or something else but qmail...
Your criticism of qmail is off-topic for this list, and quite besides the point of the original posters question, which I will restate below without mention of qmail:
In any case, given the circumstances and the timescales, qmail is an "unmovable" item at this point in time.
The current setup:
- Pine configured to send mail via localhost (MTA)
- MTA on localhost send mail to SMTP server
- SMTP server allow/reject connections based on POP-before-SMTP
- SMTP server performs spam and virus checks
This isn't that unreasonable a setup - because the laptop may not be connected at all times, he wants to have a local MTA on the laptop to deposit mail into while offline. That MTA is configured to relay all mail via his primary MTA, which scans incoming/outgoing mail and delivers it to the appropriate remote MTA. As such, whether he is running postfix or qmail (or Sendmail) *on the laptop*, he wanted to know why POP-before-SMTP broke on his primary server.
Exactly!
It's not that I disagree with you that POP-before-SMTP is suboptimal and should be replaced with AUTH; it's that you are being such an a$$h0le in your anti-qmail fervor, that any wisdom you may be imparting is lost in the vitriol.
While I understand that SMTP AUTH may be an excellent solution, I need to take into account our current environment and circumstances. It looks like we need to keep POP-before-SMTP around for a while, possibly move to SMTP AUTH at some point in the future. Would be great if POP-before-SMTP continued working.
Thank you.