Re: Recent spam increase
- From: Steve Lamb <grey@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 10:30:28 -0700
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
Not just MUAs do IMAP. MDAs can do it too. And procmail is also a
MDA (according to its documentation). However procmail is no longer
developed and is too old to support IMAP. But couldn't mailagent
support IMAP via a Perl module?
Er... how and why? I'm really confused on where IMAP and MDAs ever meet.
The normal chain is like this:
MTA->MDA->Mail Store->IMAP->MUA
For your statement to be meaningful the MDA would have to be moved between
IMAP and MUA. I just don't ever see an MDA there nor can I fathom a reason
for it to be there. Unless someone is using Fetchmail on an IMAP store. In
that case it goes something like:
MTA->MDA->Mail Store->IMAP->Fetchmail->MTA->MDA->MUA
Of course this gets into the whole debate on fetchmail treating IMAP as a
glorified POP and we're back to where we're started, IE, the MDA isn't
speaking IMAP.
--
Steve C. Lamb | But who decides what they dream?
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | And dream I do...
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Recent spam increase
- From: Vincent Lefevre
- Re: Recent spam increase
- References:
- Recent spam increase
- From: Martin Möller
- Re: Recent spam increase
- From: Vincent Lefevre
- Re: Recent spam increase
- From: Manoj Srivastava
- Re: Recent spam increase
- From: Pollywog
- Re: Recent spam increase
- From: Manoj Srivastava
- Re: Recent spam increase
- From: Vincent Lefevre
- Recent spam increase
- Prev by Date: Re: The sad demise of an etch.
- Next by Date: Re: No xterm (or equivalents) immediately accessible in default etch
- Previous by thread: Re: Recent spam increase
- Next by thread: Re: Recent spam increase
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
