Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!cornell!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!sei!sei.cmu.edu!pdb
From: pdb@sei.cmu.edu (Patrick Barron)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: SendMail
Message-ID: <5534@aw.sei.cmu.edu>
Date: 20 May 88 16:05:48 GMT
References: <8805180903.aa03398@CAD.USNA.MIL> <22208@tis.llnl.gov>
Sender: netnews@sei.cmu.edu
Reply-To: pdb@sei.cmu.edu (Pat Barron)
Followup-To: comp.mail.sendmail
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, SEI, Pgh, Pa
Lines: 20

In article <22208@tis.llnl.gov> bae@ati.tis.llnl.gov (Hwa Jin Bae) writes:
>I don't know how you are using MMDF but it's
>concept is closer to modern mail system models like X.400 where several
>delivery mechanism can be handled transparently.  MMDF allows you to
>have separate processes for mail delivery channels which can be totally
>different.

sendmail will let you do exactly the same thing - it's not just a big,
complicated SMTP implementation.  It can do UUCP, BITNET, SMTP, local
Unix mail, etc.  It can let you vary how (or if, at all) a message gets
delivered depending on what the address looks like and/or who the sender is.
You can define different mailers which use the same delivery mechanism but
with different parameters.

I'll certainly admit that it's very complex, probably much more so than
it needs to be - especially if you have to hack the configuration file.

[Usenet followups redirected to comp.mail.sendmail]

--Pat.