Re: Efficient final message disposition (was Re: [Mailman-Developers] Requirements for a new archiver)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ab200/ab20040a4ca373c1ead6206c48db39968128ca3b" alt=""
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 16:04:43 +0100 Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be> wrote:
At 8:20 PM -0500 2003/10/30, J C Lawrence wrote:
True. Its not a very difficult process, and is absurdly expensive the way I handle it. At some point in my copious spare time I should whack another couple config tokens into Exim, just to up the ante.
Aye, but some care should be taken here defining who the people are, between the Good-For-Mailman, and Good-For-Large-Mail-Systems camps. They're related, but not synonymous.
Yup. I did it at the first level with an initial SMTP proxy which routed based on MX response records pulled from a DB.
True.
<nod>
Mailmerge and VERP customisation, and the standards for the communication of those things to the MTA are areas that need attention, both for Mailman and the rest of the market (tho the IronPort and related guys might argue). This would be a good point to get some cross-MTA discussion going on.
We're not in the game of second guessing the MTAs. That way lies wasted time and madness.
If there were MLTAs which were optimized for this function,
IIRC QMail has a (typically DJB) VERP/rewrite handoff method. I also recall that it is very bound into QMail's process and IO model, but perhaps this should be examined?
There's that audience problem again. I actually agree with you in the general case, and am willing to spend time and effort in that direction. However I see this as somewhat disjoint from Mailman in specific.
--
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
participants (1)
-
J C Lawrence