On Tue, 26 Nov 1996, Dom Mitchell wrote:
> I was under the impression that was what queue_smtp did. Ah well,
> hack time. How easy is it to make a "queue_nonlocal" option?
Should be dead easy. I have put it on the wishlist, under the name
"queue_remote". The difference from queue_smtp is that when you
subsequently run the queue, each message is going to make its own SMTP
call. With queue_smtp, it remembers which messages are queued for which
hosts (strictly, IP addresses) and then combines them in the same call
when possible.
What you *really* want, I suppose, is queue_nonlocal, and then a
separate command line option which says "go down the queue and route
everything, but don't send it". You would run that when you connect to
the world. After that, if you run -q you would get the best use of SMTP
calls. Hmm. I'll think about that one too, but I suspect for small
numbers of messages at each connect time, it probably isn't worth it.
--
Philip Hazel University Computing Service,
ph10@??? New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG,
P.Hazel@??? England. Phone: +44 1223 334714
