Hello Eddie,

On Tuesday, June 18, 2002 at 9:45:31 AM you wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (at least in part):

EC> Could this work?

It could and will work. BUT: you'll never make anyone 'believe' you're an
MTA. Because for recipient server it doesn't matter what is sending: MUA or
MTA. It's SMTP. Pure. Nothing else. No 'identification string' to prove
you're an MTA. Nothing. Nada. Njente. Nietschewo.
The only advantage you _MIGHT_ get is: a local MTA _can_ try to directly
connect the official MX when sending the mail and therefore lower the
number of intermediate hops for transferring the mail. But this might be a
disadvantage as well, as just this connection could be slow, while the very
next SMTP-server used as a 'smart host' could be 10 times as fast
accessible.

So all in all you'll succeed with Hamster or something like this as well as
with running BatPost, XMailServer or even a Windows Sendmail port.
It simply doesn't matter when viewing the effects and results so you should
take the one with most less resource usage which should be Hamster in the
enumeration above.
-- 
Regards
Peter Palmreuther                            mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(The Bat! v1.60q on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 2)

I don't care, it's assimilation for you!


______________________________________________________
Archives   : http://tbtech.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to