Serge Knystautas wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > Instead, I propose that we add an attribute that RemoteDelivery will
check,
> > for the purpose of adding dynamic gateway support. If the attribute is
> > present, RemoteDelivery treats it as the gateway for that Mail,
otherwise
> > RemoteDelivery operates as normal. A single mailet could check for
> > mappings, and add the attribute as necessary. This would be a very
simple
> > change to RemoteDelivery, allows a data driven solution, and is far
cleaner,
> > at least in my mind.
> I rather dislike this overloading approach to mailet configuration. I
> think you'll soon end up with another Redirect mailet that few
> understand and is trying to be another Swiss army knife.
Well, I hope not, but on the other hand, we did clean up the Redirect area,
and it does provide neccessary capabilities.
Another alternative would be enhancing the DNSServer code so that it could
be given locally authoritative mappings. That is closer to the semantic we
want, since we ask the DNS server to map a domain to an SMTP server.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
