Slashdot Mirror
CNN on Sendmail for NT
J. Pierpont writes "CNN has an article on, of all things, sendmail. The unusual thing is that sendmail for NT is not open source. The article goes on to highlight some of the security advantages that it has over Exchange Server. I still think it's odd that CNN would have an article about sendmail."
That is, truly abysmal.
We were setting up an NT laptop to demo against a Samba box last week, and I got so frustrated just watching my boss (who actually works with NT) (my job title is Linux Specialist, I don't have to ever even boot Windows unless StarOffice can't handle the attachment) beat his head against that operating system, I finally told him straight out, "Don't ever make me program on NT. I'll quit."
I should think this is actually less a migration tool from *nix to NT and more in the other (better) direction. After all, replace Exchange with Sendmail, IIS with Apache, Office with StarOffice, and you may as well replace what's underneath it with something lighter, faster, and stronger...
As for sendmail being full of holes, it was my understanding that most things post-8.8 were pretty well fixed, with the usual turnaround time (sub-24 hours) on anything new...
I still think it's odd that CNN would have an article about sendmail.
Umm.. that's because it's a reprinted article from LinuxWorld. CNN reprints a lot of stuff that comes from IDG magazines..
It's not really odd; they've been advertising their closed-source Sendmail Pro thing for some time here on Slashdot.
Of course, the only reason anyone would need Sendmail Pro is because of the sheer user hostility of sendmail.cf and friends. Keep that bat book handy.
I've switched all my machines over to Exim. Nice configuration files, and licensed under the GPL.
I think the real question this article raises is...if you're setting up a mail server, and you've chosen sendmail as your MTA, why in the heck would you want to run it on NT?
--
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page
I'd just like to draw attention to one problem with the current moderation forms. In flat mode, you select a moderation action from the list (+1/-1, comment) then you scroll down to read the next article. Unfortunately, the text focus stays in the selection list (BAD DESIGN, netscape). You hit an arrow key, the screen doesn't move, so instead you use the mouse or whatever. In the meantime, you just changed your moderation selection - it's way off screen, so you don't notice it until you hit the "moderation" button at the bottom of the screen. Then you see this nice little list of moderation actions you did, some of which you never intended, with no way to undo it. ****There has to be an "undo-moderation" button****. This is a very frustrating user-interface issue.
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
<Obligatory NT whipping>
Why should Exchange users be the only ones to enjoy the pretty blue user interface? Now even Sendmail admins can benefit from revolutionary new error messages!
The BSOD was the only thing missing from Unix sendmail. Well, that and a Navajo code talker to translate the .cf files.
You have new mail. You will have to restart your computer for this change to take effect.
</Obligatory NT whipping>
Sendmail and Exchange can't really be compared directly as they fulfill different needs. Sendmail is a MTA, Exchange is much more. The functions that sendmail provide are covered by one section of exchange. It's the Internet mail server (or connector) and not the Exchange MTA that's the parallel for those that are curious)
IMO, as an MTA, Sendmail wins hands down, for several reasons, being better at anti-spam, and general potential configurabiliy. Exchange however, would win on ease of configurability. (I'm not including sendmail pro, which I have no experience of, just sendmail via M4 and the cf file.)
Interestingly, this is almost typical of my experiences of MS vs opensource projects, the MS one is easier to configure, even if the OSS is more powerful overall.
Back to the topic, I've used and configured Sendmail, (right down to the cf file level when it wasn't doing stuff correctly). I've used exchange from 4.0 to 5.5. Both seem to be fine for thier respective purposes, albeit with a little work on both sides.
--
Exigo spamos et dona ferentes
part, and one that other vendors might do well
to mimic.
First, from an "ethical" perspective: NT is a
closed-source proprietary operating system. The
expectation that you'll get quality open-source
apps on NT is and should be unrealistic. It is
easier to create open-source software in an open
environment, and that's exactly what Linux and
BSD provides.
Moreover, because of the closed nature of NT, it
is more of an investment to get software working
"natively" on NT than under Linux (where almost
any task you'd want to do has been done and a
high-quality example has been published). Sendmail
is just "protecting their investment", an action
necessitated by Microsoft's strategy of using
closed proprietary APIs. Another reason for IT
people NOT to lock themselves into Microsoft's
proprietary solutions.
Now, from a business perspective: Win32 is where
the money is right now. If Sendmail can pick up
good revenue from selling their product closed
under NT, they'll have less incentive to keep
their extensions closed under Linux. This may
be the best of both worlds --- they can keep the
goodwill of the Linux community by distributing
open software there, but make money by charging
people to use it under NT.
It seems like an interesting alternative open-
source business model to me. Why haven't more
people discussed this as a way of making money
off open source development?
I think lately people have begun to realize that Perl and Sendmail and co are superior to their counterparts on NT so instead of learning Unix/Linux and actually getting the "real" thing they ask for an NT version. IMO this doesn't fix the problem it simply maskes it. You will still have all the problems you normally have with an NT mailer. Just because it's sendmail it doesn't mean that it will magically fix everything that's wrong with NT.
Vidi, vici, veni. (I saw, I conquered, I came)
If sendmail adds security, exactly how bad is Exchange Server??
This is because sendmail's license is based upon the BSD license. It specifically allows software to become closed.
I don't want to start a GPL vs BSD flame war here, but this is a good example of the possibilities of the BSD license.
--
For a start, it's not a Sendmail story; it's an NT story. More specifically, it's a Unix Flagship App being Made Available for NT story. For me, the relevant paragraph cites Sendmail as making NT "more scaleable and more secure". This is a big thing (as we all know), and a factor that may weigh heavily in the minds of NT admins considering migration.
Which means there'll probably be a slew of 'traitor', 'sell-out', etc aimed at Sendmail, all of which cheerfully ignore the reality of business; companies are around to make money and the best way of doing that is to have your software work on as many machines as possible.
This could well be a blow to Linux's increasing popularity as it addresses some fundamental concerns about NT. But that's no reason to blame Sendmail.
For me, the great benefit of Sendmail on NT (and while is this strictly speaking from experience with the MetaInfo owned version, after trying out 3.0 at Networld it appears to be just as valid) was twofold:
1) it just works. period. At a previous job, we had to use NT because of a state project, and I didn't want to have exchange doing direct mail transfers. So, we got SendMail/NT, and it works like a champ. As a gateway, it's unbeatable.
The new version is even nicer, and it fixes a lot of the inabilities of 2.5 to customize setups.
Frankly, I don't understand the person who talked about its instability- ours was on a pII/350 (256 megs ram, 8 gigs hd) that was running IIS and Proxy 2, and that was a box that never hiccuped*. At last check, there were over 4 gigs of mail sent and 11 gigs of mail received on that box, with but 2 messages hiccuping. It doesn't interfere with other services, and it starts and stops quickly.
Now, I don't really know about its robustness for POP purposes. We didn't use it that way. The only account was mine for mail list reading. I have heard that the new version makes performance quite effective, as the previous one did apparently suffer with more than 500 pop accounts.
2) It finances sendmail's continued existence. When they bought out MetaInfo's product, Sendmail Inc. raised prices and removed the unlimited POP option, causing some grumbling. Before, it cost $250 for schools, with unlimited users. Still, for nonprofits, it's still a bargain (if you have to use NT), and the effective cost per user is less than exchange's.
*The big problem with NT is the myriad ways that it can screw up. But at root I think is people who think that making a production NT server requires less planning than a *nix box.
I wouldn't dream of taking a by-the-server-wizard installation of Redhat directly to use, and similarly, it's foolish to expect the same of NT in spite of Microsoft's portrayal. Plus, the other things that get added (like HP's print tools) can complicate matters unnecessarily.
Nor would I put it in use with testing it, and then rebuilding it from scratch, if it was my first such setup.
stored on computers from birth to the grave
I've deployed quite a few NT servers, but these days, I'm finding unix boxen more and more appealing. Unlike most people who gripe about the stability of NT, this isn't my issue. I have NT servers that have been running for well over a year without a hitch. My newfound preference for unix is due to flexibility. Configuring NT services is nowhere near as flexible as configuring comparable unix services, not without getting into some real code anyhow.
It's interesting how they point out the easy to use UI for configuring sendmail on NT. Although the primary reason I like unix is due to the power available by modifying configuration files to taste, I still think there should be two levels of configuration for any particular service.
Even if the second level is just a "browser" to give you an overview of the current setup, it would be a welcome addition. Sometimes its aggrevating to scroll through huge config files just to find one particular setting. I wouldn't give up the slightest bit of flexibility for it, but it would be nice.
I personally consider the port of sendmail a good thing. Exchange has some nice features, but it's a serious dog. And I've had the unfortunate experience of developing exchange/outlook commercial plug-ins on both the client and server side. It wasn't as bad as notes/vim, but it was close.