>
> pop/imap daemons have a significant issue which exim is spared:
> authentication. I'm certain it would be better to integrate them into the
> system than make them part of the exim package.
> Just think how many different authentication methods Phil would have to
> support: password files, shadow passwords, NIS, NIS+, pam, ...
> And I don't see how exim would gain anything from this.
exim already handles NIS, NIS+ and NDIS (?) as well as some other database
formats, which is basically all that password authentication is.
Exim (the MTA) doesn't gain, but in terms of functionality Exim (the
package) does. Don't get me wrong, I accept that this is a significant
change from the current exim package, _but_ I suspect that a LARGE proportion
of the people who use exim use pop/imap daemons as well. It would be
nice/conveniant to have it altogether.
> That sounds like a very good reason not to have another pop/imap daemon.
> Let us not dilute the effort into making/keeping them secure.
*blink* I have seen the discussions on some of these pop daemons, and one
comment that was made was
'security appears to have not been on the list of considerations when
developing [this]' (or words to that effect)
I'll admit that I've not played too much with the internals of exim
code since unlike much of the other stuff I have to deal with it happens
to _work_, and it compiles _cleanly_!
Lets wait to see if Philip has any desire to do anything with this, or
come to that the time!
Julian
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
