No, I never said _you_(every person on this mailing list) are not a real mail
admin, I don't know anyone on the list, and because of that I can't judge your
or someone else's competence.
When I said "needs that should be essential for every mx server admin" I didn't
judge your level of knowledge, i commented (IMHO, like I stated once) that
those features should today be used on every MX server, or at least availible.
I'm not targeting at ldap. I'm talking about helo(rcpt to, false "helo fqdn",
etc.) checks. Until I switched from qmail, I wasn't aware how many my spam
mails would be blocked with this "really simple" feature.
I used qmail for five years. Switched from it half a year ago, and now, instead
receiving complaints every few days about how much spam my customers get (and
your's probably get it too, since you have 2k of mailboxes on your server) I
just tail mail.log and watch that beautiful output of rejected damn spam
messages that terrorized my server for a 3 years now.
And instead of upgrading my MX storage (the server where proccessed(valid)
mails go, pop3(s)/imap(s) - EX primary smtp(s) for clients domain which still
works on qmail/vpopmail) for which I needed to reissue RR trouble ticket every
few days because of the load the machine was getting, I can work and
concentrate on other stuff.
However, I'm not forcing my opinion on anyone. If qmail do the job you and your
clients require, that's fine.
Kind Regards,
Sasa
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 10:45:57 -0500
Roger Merchberger <zmerch@30below.com> wrote:
> Rumor has it that Sasa Ugrenovic may have mentioned these words:
>
> >For my needs (the needs that should be essential for every MX server admin)
>
> My problem is this, Sasa:
>
> Are you saying that because I don't need most of the patches you think you
> need, that I'm not a real mail admin?
>
> You mentioned that you've been on the list for about 3 years - I've been on
> the list _over ten_ - I started with qmail 0.96. [1] It's done the job I've
> asked of it for over a decade, with very few patches, on much less hardware
> than any other package I've tested.
>
> > I need to install at least 6-7 different patches.
>
> I'm glad you do. Your mailserver is different from mine, and I don't need
> them. You tell me why I need ldap to deliver a little POP3 mail? (and by
> little, I mean about 3K mailboxen.)
>
> Whatever you use works better for you than qmail. Fine. I get that.
> However, you're not me, and denigrating me by saying *every mail admin*
> needs these is just wrong.
>
> I don't care what you run on your mailserver. I take issue when you tell me
> *what I have to run on mine to be considered a real admin.* I get along
> just fine on my own most of the time, and if I haven't said it enough,
> thanks again to Russell, Charles, Erwin, DJB and all those I don't have
> room enough to mention over the years when I've pinged the list after I've
> had a massive brainfart. ;-)
>
> Laterz,
> Roger "Merch" Merchberger
>
> [1] I fully understand that some of you are mumbling under your breath at
> me: "Damn Young Punk." ;-)
>
> --
> Roger "Merch" Merchberger | "Profile, don't speculate."
> SysAdmin, Iceberg Computers | Daniel J. Bernstein
> zmerch@30below.com |
>
|