Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!mailrus!purdue!decwrl!vixie
From: vixie@decwrl.dec.com (Paul Vixie)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Sendmail and pathalias
Message-ID: <89@volition.dec.com>
Date: 25 Aug 88 22:38:04 GMT
References: <75@volition.dec.com> <13206@mimsy.UUCP>
Organization: DEC Western Research Lab
Lines: 22

I've got five articles to respond to in this group today, I'll try to keep it
short.

In article <13206@mimsy.UUCP> chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes:
# have sendmail `deliver' everything to a program that does the routing,
# then hands the message back to sendmail for *real* delivery.  

Someone else followed this up with a description of a local hack to smail
that uses this trick.  I can see the need for this if you either have a
very large machine that can fork many processes per second, or if you don't
have or don't want sendmail source.

If you don't mind maintaining sendmail source code, you can get a very fast
and very elegant solution to this problem with IDA or something like it.

I understand why many people would prefer not to deal with modified sendmail
source code, though.  Perhaps Berkeley can be convinced to include IDA in
Sendmail 5.60?  I know L.L. (IDA's author) is willing...
-- 
Paul Vixie
Digital Equipment Corporation	Work:  vixie@dec.com	Play:  paul@vixie.UUCP
Western Research Laboratory	 uunet!decwrl!vixie	   uunet!vixie!paul
Palo Alto, California, USA	  +1 415 853 6600	   +1 415 864 7013