From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jun 23 05:50:23 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA07450 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Tue, 23 Jun 1998 05:50:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from mrelay.jrc.it (mrelay.jrc.it [139.191.1.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA07422 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 1998 05:50:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nick.hibma@jrc.it) Received: from elect8 (elect8.jrc.it [139.191.71.152]) by mrelay.jrc.it (LMC5688) with SMTP id OAA26440; Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:50:07 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:43:28 +0200 (MET DST) From: Nick Hibma X-Sender: n_hibma@elect8 Reply-To: Nick Hibma To: Andrew Reilly cc: FreeBSD hackers mailing list Subject: Re: - pop3 - URGENT In-Reply-To: <19980623180009.36116@gurney.reilly.home> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > To the others who have mentioned that there are dangers associated > with such a configuration: what are they? Dan's arguments in favour > of the arrangement seemed pretty convincing to me. Home directories are very often stored on NFS drvies. If you ask sendmail to store a message on a NFS mounted drive that is unavailable, it blocks until the drive becomes available. By that time the message has been accepted and deleted from the senders queue. If the sendmail dos not succeed in saving that message into the box because the NFS drive does not come online, that implies the message is lost. Are at least that is what I think will happen. Nick STA-ISIS, T.P.270, Joint Research Centre, Italy building: 27A tel.: +39 332 78 9549 fax.: +39 332 78 9185 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message