In message <[log in to unmask]>, Stephen Marquard writes:
> > This also has the advantage that you can wire the Windoze boxes into a LAN
> > situation with the LINUX box being the central mail server.
> I certainly wouldn't argue with that, as we use Linux/FreeBSD a lot
> ourselves (without compression/bsmtp, but bidirectional i protocol
Ah, your ISP has been dumbing down so they can't configure BSMTP?
> The advantage of (some) Windows-based solutions is in low entry cost
> and lower technology barriers (i.e. one can post someone a CD, and
> they can usually get it running with almost no technical experience,
> whereas installing and configuring an OSS unix is a somewhat
> higher-level activity, though it's getting easier nowadays).
I have considerable experience and expertise in exactly this
situation, but I tend to disagree, at least in the Ugandan
context. They are a USAID supported/funded Research Institute, they
can bloody well learn :-)-O
> UUCP g protocol also allows variable packet and window sizes, and
> presumably the cell modems will do text compression as well.
Still horribly inefficient, because you can't send and receive at the
same time, which `i' can.
> It would also be possible to add BSMTP support (batching and
> gzipping) to UUPC/extended, which is also open source, although I
> think i protocol would require drastic changes. (Someone once sent
> me some BSMTP code, but I haven't had time to even look at it, or a
> software budget to oursource any of the development, and
> unfortunately it's not on the original author's priority list.)
I would not spend a second on it. Go linux or go TCP/PPP.
> However if the hardware & expertise is available, unix solutions
> will almost always lead to lower operating costs. Of course if
> someone ported Taylor UUCP to the Win32 environment ...
Ah well, and sendmail and bsmtp and and and. WHy not take a real
operating system in the first place :-)-O