[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration
From: |
Neil W Rickert |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration |
Date: |
Tue, 03 Feb 2004 07:10:26 -0600 |
Ken Hornstein <address@hidden> wrote on Feb 3, 2004:
>>| nmh normally submits a message using smtp.
>>I've never done it that way. ``sendmail -t'' is the unix standard
>>mail injection mechanism. It has many advantages. It provides an
>>easy way to set the envelope. It means that every workstation doesn't
>>have to listen on port 25 and deal with network traffic from randoms.
>>It means that the mail injection system can authenticate the sender,
>>and enforce policy. nmh shouldn't be usurping that job.
>I believe Neil really meant to say that nmh can _only_ submit a message
>using SMTP. Even when it's piping to sendmail, it's not using -t, it's
>using -bs and speaking SMTP. The workstation doesn't have to listen on
>port 25 in that case, obviously. This is assuming that you haven't
>changed nmh to use -t (if you did, hey, that's fine ... I just want to
>be sure we're talking about the same thing).
That's not quite correct. If you use "spost" for your postproc",
then it will use "sendmail -t" or something similar. But "spost" is
certainly not the normal way of doing things. The default is, as you
say, to invoke "sendmail -bs" and talk smtp over stdio, or to talk
smtp to localhost (depends on a configuration choice).
>Please understand; I have no objection to the functionality.
Nor have I.
>I'm just not happy with the overloading of an existing header.
Why a header, rather than an environment setting?
-NWR
- Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration, (continued)
- Message not available
- Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration, Robert Elz, 2004/02/02
- Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration, Scott Schwartz, 2004/02/02
- Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration, Ken Hornstein, 2004/02/02
- Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration, schwartz+l-nmh-workers, 2004/02/02
- Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration, Ken Hornstein, 2004/02/03
- Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration, schwartz+l-nmh-workers, 2004/02/03
- Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration, Ken Hornstein, 2004/02/03
- Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration, Neil W Rickert, 2004/02/02
- Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration, schwartz+l-nmh-workers, 2004/02/02
- Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration, Ken Hornstein, 2004/02/03
- Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration,
Neil W Rickert <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration, Ken Hornstein, 2004/02/03
- Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration, schwartz+nmh-workers, 2004/02/03
- Re: [Nmh-workers] File upload frustration, Paul Fox, 2004/02/03