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...