The problem with serialmail/qmail and dialup lines

2001-02-07 Thread Paulo Jan

Hi all:

First of all, thanks to all those who responded to my question
regarding "System crash". Time to upgrade the Linux kernel, I guess...
I have now another problem, related this time with serialmail and the
old topic of messages-addressed-to-several-users-sent-separately. I have
recently installed AutoTURN for a customer that was using sendmail in
their local Linux proxy/mail server until now, and whose connection to
us is an ISDN dial-up line. Things are working OK so far... except that
these customer's users need to send often large attachments (1-5 Mb.),
each of them to several people. Given qmail's way of dealing with
multi-recipient mails, this means that my customer's messages are taking
longer to reach me.
I am aware of the causes behind this design decision taken in qmail,
and I know that this subject has been beaten to death in this list; what
I haven't seen yet, though, is a solution to this particular case I'm
talking about. I've been in this list, on and off, for about two years,
and I have seen the issue discussed several times, but have never seen a
solution for this particular case (customer on a dialup line, sending
large mails to several people). Has anyone come up with a way to deal
with this situation? Or is this one of the cases where other MTAs could
actually have done a better job?



Paulo Jan.
DDnet.



Re: The problem with serialmail/qmail and dialup lines

2001-02-08 Thread Dave Sill

Paulo Jan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>I've been in this list, on and off, for about two years,
>and I have seen the issue discussed several times, but have never seen a
>solution for this particular case (customer on a dialup line, sending
>large mails to several people). Has anyone come up with a way to deal
>with this situation?

The best workaround I'm aware of is to set up a list containing the
recipients on the server. That won't help much if the list is
dynamic.

>Or is this one of the cases where other MTAs could
>actually have done a better job?

Yes, other MTA's could handle this more efficiently.

-Dave