Believe me, I'm well aware that sendmail isn't the only MTA in
existence, and I certainly didn't mean to imply otherwise. It would,
however, seem rather odd to discuss deployed message filtering systems
without considering procmail (as an example, not necessarily as a
model for how I think such systems should work.) Obviously, since
procmail is normally invoked through sendmail, discussing procmail
will entail reference to sendmail.
Anyway, you're point about functionality and architecture is certainly
a valid one. While I suspect most users probably don't think about
procmail any more than se...their MTA (sorry, I couldn't resist), and
probably less, users do think of vacation as a program they use.
Still, there is a fundamental architectural difference between
programs like vacation and what might be called "passive clients" like
POP/IMAP clients. Anyway, we need some kind of a terminological
distinction (MFA?). I'm open to suggestions.
Finally, with regard to your point about the appropriateness of MTAs
running programs on behalf of the user: I certainly don't feel
disposed to argue with you. I think procmail (when invoked via
.forward) represents an attempt to fill a need, and I believe that
need is real, but that certainly does not mean I think this is the
ideal solution. The very fact that a user can do a lot of damage
through having a misconfigured .procmailrc is argument enough that the
solution is flawed. Don't misunderstand my comments as an attempt to
argue otherwise.
Gregory Woodhouse gregory(_dot_)woodhouse(_at_)med(_dot_)va(_dot_)gov
May the dromedary be with you.
----------
From: Andy Poling [SMTP:andy(_at_)globalauctions(_dot_)com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 1998 7:27 PM
To: Woodhouse, Gregory J.
Cc: 'ietf-mta-filters(_at_)imc(_dot_)org'
Subject: Re: Are vacation and procmail MUAs?
You're confusing functionality with who runs things when. Procmail
and
other processing and other forwarding software and functions can (and
should) operate independantly of the MTA, and they operate on the
user's
behalf (even if the user didn't actually "run" them herself).
The fact is that you do sort of make a valid point in a backwards way,
and
that point is that the MTA/MDA should *not* be running software on
behalf of
the user.
And puh-lease stop saying "sendmail". That is only one example of an
MTA
(say it with me: "em-tee-ay"). There are other MTAs that (properly
IMHO)
_don't_ run user-supplied programs on behalf of the user.
-Andy
Global Auctions
http://www.globalauctions.com