This has been an ongoing argument on the qmail list. Some 'purists' believe that there is no need for any patch apart from QMAILQUEUE which dan has indicated he will probably include in the next version.
While I was initially sceptical about this I can see some logic in what they are saying. Take TLS for example, why not just use a wrapper rather than a patch? Anyway, for those who are interested there are plenty of pros and cons listed in the qmail archives. cheers, iain. On Fri, 7 Feb 2003 06:01, Davide Giunchi wrote: > > Just out of genuine curiosity, were you actually seeing problems that > > required each of those patches? I've been running a > > qmail/vpopmail/sqwebmail/qmailadmin setup for the past year now and have > > yet to actually find need for a patch. > > There's a lot of needs that plain qmail doesn't suite our needs, i can tell > you someone: > > - spam prevention, with plain qmail do you have only > badmailfrom+tcp.smtp+rbl. some patches make qmail use badmailto to filter > against destination, regex in badmailfrom/badmail to block particular > domain or name, tarpitting to make large-isp with a lot of ip enabled to > relaying not too much vulnerable to spam. > - content filtering: with qmail you cannot pass all emails to an external > filter (like perl script) to customize/filter the messages. With content > filter i intend virus filtering too > - smtp-auth-relaying: useful for big lan with some external users > - smtp-after-pop: vpopmail feature that do this is good for small traffic > network, but when you have 100 or more concurrent connection to the pop3 > you cannot use binary file but you must use a database. > > I could tell some of other needs, but i think that this is enought. > > Regards.
