Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 20 Jun 1997 16:07:54 -0400 (EDT)
From:      "Gary D. Margiotta" <gary@tbe.net>
To:        Ron Bickers <rbickers@intercenter.net>
Cc:        Jack Wenger <info@bentreality.com>, FreeBSD ISP list <freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: Q-MAIL
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970620152949.9812B-100000@lightning.tbe.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970620130153.14201A-100000@bigboy.intercenter.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
We also run Q-Mail rather than sendmail, and will (hopefully) never go
back.  Q-Mail is a huge improvement in many ways over sendmail.  For
starters, it is much smaller and more streamlined.  Second, the guy who
wrote it was a security freak, and didn't release it until he couldn't
hack into his own creation (or so the story goes, I really don't know how
true that is).  Q-Mail runs only a couple processes, and they are idle
until they are needed, PLUS there are only a couple of processes who run
as root, not the entire program like sendmail.  The most important thing
about it security wise is that it isn't well known yet, so it hasn't
gotten the attention of to many hackers.

It took a short while to get used to when we first did it because when we
installed it it was still using /Maildir rather tham mbox format so we had
to kludge things a bit.  Also you have to modify the pop3 side of it a
bit, but we are now working on fixing popper to work with it.  We started
with version .95, but now it is at 1.01, and has been great.  Virtual
domains are a joke to route mail for, and best of all, it is very non-CPU
intensive, so you can run a full fledged mail server on a very minimal
machine.

IMHO, go with Q-Mail....we have been for about a year now, and couldn't be
happier.

-Gary Margiotta
TBE Internet Services
http://www.tbe.net




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95q.970620152949.9812B-100000>