In message <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970902102703.4111B-100000@???>,
Tom Samplonius writes:
> I hate the trend on how MTA documention is becoming filled product
> comparisons. I would much rather see open and frank analysis of features
> and limitations.
Yes, it can be negative, although not necessarily so, depending on how
the author tackles the issue. A straight comparison of facilities can
be very useful if done in a reasonably unbiased fashion.
The emerging concept of "MTA wars" is kind of silly though. Different
MTAs are designed for different purposes, and it's definitely not the
case that the one with the most facilities is best. [I've had the
misfortune of working with PP.] Exim's good configurability and nice
design model makes it well suited to a wide variety of applications,
and that advantage is not going to disappear unless other MTAs appear
with a huge performance advantage or unless someone finds a deadly hole
inherent in Exim's security model. That seems fairly unlikely though,
seeing as Exim gained an order of magnitude performance advantage over
sendmail and Philip and others do pay attention to Exim security issues.
Having said that, keeping one eye on other MTAs is always a good idea.
If for no other reason, it can suggest areas where we might improve ours.
Rich.
--
########### Dr. Rich Artym ================ PGP public key available
# galacta # Email : rich@??? 158.152.156.137
# ->demon # Web : http://www.galacta.demon.co.uk - temp page only
# ->ampr # AMPR : rich@g7exm[.uk].ampr.org 44.131.164.1 BBS:GB7MSW
# ->NTS # Fun : Unix, X, TCP/IP, kernel, O-O, C++, SoftEng, Nano
########### More fun: Regional IP Coordinator Hertfordshire + N.London
--
* This is sent by the exim-users mailing list. To unsubscribe send a
mail with subject "unsubscribe" to exim-users-request@???
* Exim information can be found at http://www.exim.org/
