On Thu, Jan 28, 1999 at 05:04:20PM +0000, Mark Carpenter wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 28, 1999 at 02:57:30PM +0000, Mark Carpenter wrote:
> > > Thanks. I was affraid of that. Drat! I finally got everything working
> > > together, too. Any suggestions for a package that would be good in
> > > this situation. The boss isn't going to let that fly.
> >
> > In those situations in which you're sending big files to someone, you could
> > point your mail program straight at your ISP's SMTP server (assuming you're
> > injecting these messages with SMTP).
> >
> > Do you have a full-time connection and a static IP address? If so, you might
> > get some nice person (like your ISP) to accept mail from you by QMQP. They'd
> > have to install qmail, but it wouldn't interfere with sendmail or whatever
> > they're using. This would let you supply a single message and as many
> > recipients as you like, and queue the whole thing remotely.
> >
> > Chris
> >
>
> Bingo! Our service provider recently changed hands. Turns out we
> can get a virtual machine that I can have configuration control over
> for $5 less a month than we are paying for now, plus get quite a bit
> more disk space. I'll just set up QMQP there. Cool.
Now that I think of it, QMQP won't give your users the instant gratification
they're looking for (i.e. not having to wait for the entire message to be
transferred over the phone line). Since with mini-qmail there's no local queue,
they're still going to have to wait until the message is queued at the remote
end of the phone line before their MUA cuts them loose. If you want mail queued
locally, you're back to where you started.
Perhaps, as someone suggested, UUCP is your best option.
Chris
