Mailing List ArchiveSupport open source code!
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]Re: tlug: A myriad of mailers
- To: tlug@example.com
- Subject: Re: tlug: A myriad of mailers
- From: Rex Walters <rex@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 16:18:43 -0800
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.05.9903110759490.2765-100000@example.com>; from Chris Sekiya on Thu, Mar 11, 1999 at 08:02:23AM +0900
- Mail-Followup-To: tlug@example.com
- References: <19990310144619.D12491@example.com> <Pine.LNX.4.05.9903110759490.2765-100000@example.com>
- Reply-To: tlug@example.com
- Sender: owner-tlug@example.com
>>>>> Chris Sekiya writes: (on 11 Mar 99) > Welcome to my killfile. And Dan Bernstein is considered arrogant and difficult to get along with? I'm sorry that Chris has had problems with qmail, but fwiw, in my personal experience I know far more people who have had difficulty with sendmail. I can't quite decide if Chris is sticking his head in the sand or deliberately sticking a finger in his eye (or elsewhere). I tried to post a lucid defense of qmail's response to invalid SMTP (something that's been hashed out time and again on the qmail list). Chris's reply was "The segfault happened. Trust Me. I'm not going to listen to you anymore." I love rational debate. To his credit Chris *is* volunteering his time administering the tlug server when no-one else seems willing/able. I have to wonder, though, if the lack of volunteers has anything to do with his personal charm and unilateral, pre-emptive administration practices ("I personally remember a problem in qmail THEREFORE the tlug server will only run sendmail"). Anyway, to stem any "to advocacy" rants, a final technical summary of my previous post: qmail 1.03, the production version of qmail for about 9 months, does not segfault when fed invalid SMTP of the "MAIL From: badsmtp@example.com" variety. Whether or not previous versions did isn't something I'm concerned about -- I consider this a problem of the "Doctor, Doctor, it hurts when I do this" variety. Worst case a broken smtp implementation at a remote site (or a malicious teenager with a telnet client) causes a process to die (segfault or otherwise). BFD -- well administered sites already know to use resource limiting throttles like tcpserver or xinetd to prevent obvious DOS attacks. Sendmail is a *much* bigger risk, imho. Regards, -- Rex P.S. I'm travelling (Mexico City, Canberra, and Sydney, ye gods) for the next 10 days or so -- in the near term my posts will be (mercifully, I'm sure) brief and infrequent. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Next Nomikai: March 19 (Fri), 19:30 Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691 Next Technical Meeting: April 10 (Sat), 12:30 place: Temple Univ. ------------------------------------------------------------------- more info: http://tlug.linux.or.jp Sponsor: PHT
- Follow-Ups:
- tlug: Re: A myriad of mailers
- From: Howard Abbey <habbey@example.com>
- References:
- Re: tlug: A myriad of mailers
- From: Rex Walters <rex@example.com>
- Re: tlug: A myriad of mailers
- From: Chris Sekiya <chris@example.com>
Home | Main Index | Thread Index
- Prev by Date: Re: tlug: timed
- Next by Date: tlug: Re: A myriad of mailers
- Prev by thread: Re: tlug: A myriad of mailers
- Next by thread: tlug: Re: A myriad of mailers
- Index(es):
Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links