From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: Best choice: pathalias/sendmail or smail?
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
	<CKD.92Nov15224108@loiosh.eff.org> <BxtpMz.BLs@chinet.chi.il.us>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:00:49 GMT

Leslie> == Leslie Mikesell <les@chinet.chi.il.us> 

 Leslie> Smail release 3.1.28 adds support for somewhat arbitrary
 Leslie> header-munging with contional string manipulation and database
 Leslie> lookups but I don't know if it handles everything IDA can do.
 Leslie> The configuration files are certainly easier to read, though.

 ckd> Easier than the .cf, or easier than the .m4 (assuming you use the canned
 ckd> Sendmail.mc)?  I find the .m4 *really* easy to read, especially given
 ckd> that it fits in an 80x24 window...

 Leslie> I have to admit that I didn't seriously try to understand the
 Leslie> .m4 file.

Well, our current effserver.m4 file no longer fits on a 24 line screen.
It would if I took out any two of the eight comment lines, though, so I
don't think that counts.  The client one still fits quite nicely,
though.

Here's an example snippet from effserver.m4:
define(BANGIMPLIESUUCP)
define(CHECKPOINT,1)dnl # we attempt to be supersafe on mailing lists
define(TIMEOUT, 7d)dnl # let's try to deliver for a week
define(HIDDENDOMAIN, eff.org)
define(FORCE_NAMED)

Most of the magic, of course, comes in the dbm lookups.  We handle our
UUCP-connected MX sites by putting in a mailertable entry for them; we
rewrite uusite!user to user@site.mx.dom with a domaintable entry, so the
UUCP name doesn't get out; we were able to route mail over SMTP to the
WELL before it was in the DNS (a mailertable entry for TCP,ip.ad.dr.es
did the trick there), and so on.

 Leslie> I've asked the same question a couple of times in the past few
 Leslie> years, though, and I'm not sure anyone has answered who
 Leslie> understood both mailers in depth.  Both are complex enough that
 Leslie> if you have one working you probably won't tackle the other
 Leslie> just for fun.

True enough.  We went to IDA from a sendmail setup "it's working so
don't mess with it"; I still tend not to edit sendmail.cf, but I have no
problems changing the configuration through either the m4 file or the
dbm databases.  I've never used smail, so I fit the pattern you describe :)

 Leslie> I think Smail3 has more innate knowledge about how mail should
 Leslie> be handled which can be good or bad, depending on how strange
 Leslie> your situation is.  In a typical setup, smail can be compiled
 Leslie> to use its defaults so you don't need a special configuration
 Leslie> file at all.  Where you do need a customized setup, it is
 Leslie> broken into parts for global values and the director, router,
 Leslie> and transport definitions, which relate to the steps smail uses
 Leslie> to process an address.

The IDA Sendmail.mc is Really Good about doing the Right Thing.  It is
probably not practical to run without a config file, but you can make a
pretty minimal .m4 file (10-15 lines should suffice for the vast
majority of sites, even those with mixed SMTP/UUCP environments).  Then
you put whatever "special" cases you want in the DBM files, which are
kind of broken up as you say.  MAILERTABLE short-circuits the mailer
selection; we use that for routing .BITNET pseudo-domain mail and
passing mail for our MX sites to the appropriate UUCP name.  DOMAINTABLE
is only there to qualify our MX sites, so it only needs to be 4 lines.
--
Christopher K. Davis      | ``Usenet seems to run much like the Kif (or,
<ckd@eff.org>   EFF #14   |   for the TV generation, Klingon) high command.
System Administrator, EFF |   Whoever takes action and can be heard wins.''
+1 617 864 0665  [CKD1]   |   --Peter da Silva <peter@ferranti.com>