Great Circle Associates Majordomo-Users
(July 1998)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: MTA's (was: VERY large mailing lists.)
From: Russ Allbery <rra @ stanford . edu>
Date: 15 Jul 1998 12:10:50 -0700
To: majordomo-users @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to: Rich Pieri's message of "15 Jul 1998 12:28:23 -0400"
References: <199807151552.LAA04801@cis.ohio-state.edu> <x7zpebxemw.fsf@gkar.prescienttech.com>

Rich Pieri <rich.pieri@prescienttech.com> writes:

> It is qmail and its proponents that are claiming that qmail is superior
> to sendmail.  The burden of proving that claim rests on qmail and its
> proponents.  In other words, put up or shut up.

If you're honestly curious about this question, please see my FAQ.  It
mentions several of the reasons why I think qmail is better than sendmail
for Majordomo; the primary reasons for me are better security and much
easier handling of incoming mail (no need to maintain lots of opaque
aliases), as well as totally avoiding the problem of an unprotected
outgoing alias.

Performance isn't an issue for me at all either way; my lists are
currently all very small.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)         <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


Follow-Ups:
References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: MTA's (was: VERY large mailing lists.)
From: Leslie Mikesell <les@Mcs.Net>
Next: Re: mailing lists and MTA's
From: Rich Pieri <rich.pieri@prescienttech.com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: MTA's (was: VERY large mailing lists.)
From: Rich Pieri <rich.pieri@prescienttech.com>
Next: Re: MTA's (was: VERY large mailing lists.)
From: Bryan Fullerton <bryanf@samurai.com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com