james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ajit George <ga...@kurianinc.com>
Subject Re: Mailet API v2
Date Wed, 05 Jun 2002 06:10:15 GMT
Hi - hope you guys don't mind my chiming in.

Noel J. Bergman wrote:

>And I think it would be more reliable to relay the message from one server
>to another for special processing, than to try to do RMI in the middle of
>the processing chain.  Any problems, e.g., sudden server death, are handled
>by the existing spooling and protocols.
>What it comes down to is that somewhere along the line, some aspect of
>content and behavior is going to be distributed.  You are thinking AJP, Paul
>is talking about AltRMI and SOAP.  I'm hanging my case on the RFC and
>existing mechanisms.  I don't like inventing new protocols when none seem to
>be needed.

One complaint that crops up quite often on the qmail mailing list is 
that (some) mail fetching programs relay messages from one server to 
another via SMTP.  When the receiving server is misconfigured, it relays 
the fetched mail instead of storing it (or whatever it's supposed to do) 
 and you get a loop.  So fetched mail should be routed directly to the 
local processor.

It's true that you can configure JAMES to route fetched mail directly to 
the local processor without providing a new entry point, but the 
configuration is easy to screw up.  A typo means you risk losing mail, 
wasting other systems' resources, etc.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:james-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>

View raw message