Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-lcc!rutgers!husc6!panda!genrad!decvax!decwrl!sun!plaid!chuq
From: chuq%plaid@Sun.COM (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.headers
Subject: Re: I hate smail
Message-ID: <11049@sun.uucp>
Date: Wed, 7-Jan-87 12:10:02 EST
Article-I.D.: sun.11049
Posted: Wed Jan  7 12:10:02 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 8-Jan-87 00:00:20 EST
References: <14227@amdcad.UUCP> <799@maynard.BSW.COM>
Sender: news@sun.uucp
Reply-To: chuq@sun.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Organization: Fictional Reality, uLtd
Lines: 32
Keywords: smail

In article <799@maynard.BSW.COM> campbell@maynard.UUCP (Larry Campbell) writes:
>In article <14227@amdcad.UUCP> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes:
>>
>>I hate smail.
>
>Well, I've been using smail for two months now and I think it works
>very well.

The problems with smail are caused to the people who DON'T use smail.  I'm
sure smail works just wonderfully on all the sites where it has been
installed and is maintained, but I see a LOT of return addresses that simply
don't work anymore.  There has always been a problem with bogus return
addresses, but the incidence is way up in the last few months, primarily
because smail sites love to send out return addresses like
"mark@cbosgd.att.com" -- which is great if you have smail around to figure
out where that is, but not so great if you don't -- and your sendmail system
sends the message off to ARPAland looking for the machine.

Which, I guess, brings forward the biggest hassle with domaining -- it
assumes that everyone is doing domains, which isn't true, and likely will
never be true.

[Don't take this as a anti-domain argument.  I could yell just as much about
	direct routing, and one of these days I might.  The reality is there
	just isn't a good, compatible, reasonable mailing system, so I'm
	not taking sides -- both reality and domains have advantages and
	disadvantages.  Take your choice]

chuq
Chuq Von Rospach	chuq@sun.COM

It's only a model...