1.1 --- a/thesis/tex/3-MailTransferAgents.tex	Wed Nov 26 22:11:08 2008 +0100
     1.2 +++ b/thesis/tex/3-MailTransferAgents.tex	Thu Nov 27 16:25:20 2008 +0100
     1.3 @@ -1,18 +1,28 @@
     1.4  \chapter{Mail transfer agents}
     1.5  
     1.6 -After having read about the history of electronic mail and the basics of \mta{}s in the last chapter, this chapter introduces a group of \mta{}s. Among them, the already mentioned \sendmail. The selected group will be delimited against other groups of \MTA{}s, which are described as well.
     1.7 +After having analyzed the market for electronic mail and trends for it in the last chapter, this chapter takes a look at \mta{}s, the intelligent most important parts of the email infrastructure. \MTA{}s will be grouped by similarities, and the four most popular \freesw\ \mta{}s, will be presented to the reader in a short overview and with the most important facts. At the end of this chapter a comparison of these programs in several disciplines will be done.
     1.8  
     1.9 -The chosen programs will be presented to the reader in a short overview and with the most important facts. The next chapter will show a comparison of these programs in several disciplines.
    1.10 +
    1.11  
    1.12  
    1.13  \section{Types of \MTA{}s}
    1.14 -``Mail transfer agent'' is a term covering a variety of programs. One thing is common to them: they transfer email from one \emph{thing} to another. These \emph{things} can be hosts, meaning independent machines, or protocols like \NAME{SMTP} and \NAME{UUCP}, between which mail is transfered.\footnote{\sendmail{}'s initial purpose was moving mail between \NAME{UUCP}, \NAME{SMTP}, and \name{Berknet}.}
    1.15 +``Mail transfer agent'' is a term covering a variety of programs. One thing is common to them: they transfer email from one machine to another.
    1.16  
    1.17 -Beside this common property, \MTA{}s can be very different. Some of them have \NAME{POP3} and/or \NAME{IMAP} servers included. Some can fetch mails through these protocols. Others have have all features you can think of. And maybe there are some that do nothing else but transporting email.
    1.18 +This is how Bryan Costales defines a \mta\ in \cite{costales97}:
    1.19 +\begin{quote}
    1.20 +A mail transfer agent (MTA) is a highly specialized program that delivers mail and transports it between machines, like the post office.
    1.21 +\end{quote}
    1.22 +\name{The Free Dictionary} is a bit more concrete on the term: \citeweb{website:thefreedictionary}
    1.23 +\begin{quote}
    1.24 +Message Transfer Agent - (MTA, Mail Transfer Agent): Any program responsible for delivering e-mail messages. Upon receiving a message from a Mail User Agent or another MTA, [...] it [...] delivers it to any local addressees and/or forwards it to other remote MTAs (routing) for delivery to remote recipients.
    1.25 +\end{quote}
    1.26  
    1.27 -Following are groups of \mta{}s that will \emph{not} be regarded further.
    1.28 +Common to all \MTA{}s is the transfer of mail to other machines; this is the actual job. Besides this similarity, \MTA{}s can be very different. Some of them have \NAME{POP3} and/or \NAME{IMAP} servers included. Some can fetch mails through these protocols. Others have have all features you can think of. And maybe there are some that do nothing else but transporting email.
    1.29  
    1.30 -\subsection*{Relay-only \MTA{}s}
    1.31 +Following is a classification of \mta{}s into groups of similar programs, regarding what is viewable from the outside.
    1.32 +
    1.33 +
    1.34 +\subsubsection*{Relay-only \MTA{}s}
    1.35  \label{subsec:relay-only}
    1.36  This is the most simple kind of \MTA. It transfers mail only to defined \name{smart hosts}\footnote{\name{smart host}s are \MTA{}s that receives email and route it to the actual destination}. \name{Relay-only} \MTA{}s do not receive mail from outside the system, and they do not deliver locally.
    1.37  
    1.38 @@ -23,7 +33,7 @@
    1.39  Examples for that group are: \name{nullmailer}, \name{ssmtp} and \name{esmtp}.
    1.40  
    1.41  
    1.42 -\subsection*{Groupware}
    1.43 +\subsubsection*{Groupware}
    1.44  Normally the term ``groupware'' does not mean one single program, but a suite of programs. They build a framework which is then populated with various modules that provide actual funktionality. Modules for mail transfer, file storage, calendars, resource management, instant messaging, etc., are commonly available.
    1.45  
    1.46  One would use one of these program suites if the main work to do is not mail transfer, but providing integrated communication facilities and team working support for a group of people. The most common scenario are companies. They have \name{groupware} running to provide adequate services for their teams to work efficently. But one may use \name{groupware} on the home server for his family members also.
    1.47 @@ -31,46 +41,51 @@
    1.48  Examples are: \name{Lotus Notes}, \name{Microsoft Exchange}, \name{OpenGroupware.org} and \name{eGroupWare}.
    1.49  
    1.50  
    1.51 -\subsection*{``Real'' \MTA{}s}
    1.52 -There is a third type of \mta{}s in between the minimalistic \name{relay-only} \MTA{}s and the bloated \name{groupware}. Those programs may be named ``real \MTA{}s'', or ``proper \MTA{}s'', though there is no common name. They are what is meant with the term ``\mta''.
    1.53 +\subsubsection*{``Real'' \MTA{}s}
    1.54 +There is a third type of \mta{}s in between the minimalistic \name{relay-only} \MTA{}s and the bloated \name{groupware}. Those programs may be named ``real \MTA{}s'', or ``proper \MTA{}s'', though there is no common name. They are what is meant with the term ``\mta''---programs that transfer mail between hosts.
    1.55  
    1.56 -Common to them is their focus on transfering email, while being able to act as \name{smart host}. Their variety ranges from ones mostly restricted to mail transfer (\name{qmail}) to others already having interfaces for adding further mail processing modules (\name{postfix})---thus everything in between the other two groups.  %FIXME: are postfix and qmail good examples?
    1.57 +Common to them is their focus on transfering email, while being able to act as \name{smart host}. Their variety ranges from ones mostly restricted to mail transfer (\name{qmail}) to others already having interfaces for adding further mail processing modules (\name{postfix}). They cover everything in between the other two groups.  %FIXME: are postfix and qmail good examples?
    1.58  
    1.59 -This group is of importance in this document. The programs selected for the comparison are ``real \MTA{}s''.
    1.60 +This group is of importance in this document. All programs selected for the comparison in the following section are ``real \MTA{}s''. \masqmail\ is one too.
    1.61  
    1.62  
    1.63 +\subsubsection*{Other segmenting}
    1.64 +\name{Mail transfer agents} can also be splitted in other ways.
    1.65 +\begin{itemize}
    1.66 +\item
    1.67 +Due to \sendmail's significance---described in section \ref{sec:sendmail}---compatiblity interfaces for \sendmail\ are of importance for \unix\ \MTA{}s. Being not \emph{sendmail-compatible} does not need to matter for some fields of action, but makes the program ineligible for serving as a general purpose \MTA\ on \unix\ systems. Hence being sendmail-compatible is a major property of a \mta. %todo: how many MTAs are sendmail-compatible?
    1.68 +\MTA{}s not having a \emph{sendmail-compatible} interface or not offering it as a compatibility addon, will not be covered here. One example for such a program is \name{Apache James}.  %FIXME: check if correct
    1.69  
    1.70 -\subsection*{Non-\emph{sendmail-compatible} \MTA{}s}
    1.71 -Due to \sendmail's significance---described in section \ref{sec:sendmail}---compatiblity interfaces for \sendmail\ are of importance for \unix\ \MTA{}s. Being not \emph{sendmail-compatible} does not need to matter for some fields of action, but makes the program ineligible for serving as a general purpose \MTA\ on \unix\ systems.
    1.72 +\item
    1.73 +Another separation can be done between \freesw\ programs and proprietary software. Many of the \MTA{}s for \unix\ systems are \freesw. Only these are regarded in the following sections, because comparing \freesw\ with proprietary or commercial software is not what typical users of programs like \masqmail\ do. %fixme: what are typical users?
    1.74 +Comparison with those non-free programs may be a point for large \freesw\ projects, trying to step into the business world. Small projects, mostly used by individuals at home, %fixme: is this the right target field? see chap02
    1.75 +need to be compared against other projects of similar shape. The document should be seen from \masqmail's point of view---an \MTA\ for a unix system on home servers, workstations, or maybe embedded platforms---so non-free software is out of the way.
    1.76 +\end{itemize}
    1.77  
    1.78 -Hence all \MTA{}s not having a \emph{sendmail-compatible} interface or not offering it as a compatibility addon, will not be covered here.
    1.79 -
    1.80 -An Examples here is \name{Apache James}.  %FIXME: check if correct
    1.81 -
    1.82 -
    1.83 -\subsection*{Non-free software}
    1.84 -Only programs being \freesw\ are regarded, because comparing \freesw\ with proprietary or commercial software is not what typical users of programs like \masqmail\ do. Comparison with those non-free programs may be a point for large \freesw\ projects, trying to step into the business world. Small projects, mostly used by individuals at home, need to be compared against other projects of similar shape.
    1.85 -
    1.86 -The comparison should be seen from \masqmail's point of view, so non-free software is out of the way.
    1.87  
    1.88  
    1.89  
    1.90  \section{Popular \MTA{}s}
    1.91 -The programs remaining are \emph{sendmail-compatible} ``smart'' \MTA{}s that focus on mail transfer and are \freesw. One would not use a program for a job it is not suited for. Therefor only \mta{}s that are mostly similar to \masqmail\ are regarded.
    1.92  
    1.93 -For the comparision, five programs are taken. These are: \sendmail, \name{qmail}, \name{postfix}, \name{exim}, and \masqmail. The four alternatives to \masqmail\ are the most important representatives of the regarded group. % FIXME: add ref that affirm that
    1.94 +%todo: include market share analyses here
    1.95  
    1.96 -\name{courier-mta} is also a member of this group, being even closer to \name{groupware} than \name{postfix}. It is excluded here, because the \NAME{IMAP} and webmail parts of the mail server suite are more in focus than its \MTA. Common mail server setups even bundle \name{courier-imap} with \name{postfix}.
    1.97 +One would not use a program for a job it is not suited for. Therefor only \mta{}s that are mostly similar to \masqmail\ are regarded here. These are \emph{sendmail-compatible} ``smart'' \freesw\ \MTA{}s that focus on mail transfer.
    1.98 +
    1.99 +For the comparision, five programs are taken: \sendmail, \name{exim}, \name{qmail}, \name{postfix}, and \masqmail. The four alternatives to \masqmail\ are the most important representatives of the regarded group. % FIXME: add ref that affirm that
   1.100 +
   1.101 +\name{courier-mta} is also a member of this group, being even closer to \name{groupware} than \name{postfix}. It is excluded here, because the \NAME{IMAP} and webmail parts of the mail server suite are more in focus than its \MTA. Common mail server setups even bundle \name{courier-imap} with \name{postfix}. %fixme: need this sentence?
   1.102  
   1.103  Other members are: \name{smail}, \name{zmailer}, \name{mmdf}, and more; they all are less important and rarely used.
   1.104  
   1.105 -Following is a small introduction to each of the five programs chosen for comparision.
   1.106 +Following is a small introduction to each of the five programs chosen for comparision, except \masqmail\ which already was intoduced in chapter \ref{chap:introduction}.
   1.107  
   1.108 -\subsection*{\sendmail}
   1.109 +
   1.110 +
   1.111 +\subsubsection*{\sendmail}
   1.112  \label{sec:sendmail}
   1.113 -\sendmail\ is the most popular \mta. Since it was one of the first \MTA{}s and was shipped by many vendors of \unix\ systems.
   1.114 +\sendmail\ is the most popular \mta, since it was one of the first and was shipped as default \MTA{}s by many vendors of \unix\ systems. %fixme: ref
   1.115  
   1.116 -The program was written by Eric Allman as the successor of his program \name{delivermail}. \sendmail\ was first released with \NAME{BSD} 4.1c in 1983. Allman was not the only one working on the program. Other people developed own versions of it and a variety of flavors came up, especially in the late eighties when Allman was inactive.
   1.117 +The program was written by Eric Allman as the successor of his program \name{delivermail}. \sendmail\ was first released with \NAME{BSD} 4.1c in 1983. Allman was not the only one working on the program. Other people developed own versions of it and a variety of flavors came up, especially in the late eighties when Allman was inactive. %fixme: ref
   1.118  
   1.119  \sendmail\ is focused on transfering mails between different protocols and networks, this lead to a very flexible (though complex) configuration.
   1.120  
   1.121 @@ -81,18 +96,34 @@
   1.122  More information can be found on the \sendmail\ homepage \citeweb{sendmail:homepage} and on \citeweb{wikipedia:sendmail} and \citeweb{jdebp}.
   1.123  
   1.124  
   1.125 -\subsection*{\name{qmail}}
   1.126 +
   1.127 +\subsubsection*{\name{exim}}
   1.128 +\label{sec:exim}
   1.129 +\name{exim} was started in 1995 by Philip Hazel at the \name{University of Cambridge}. It is forked of \name{smail-3}, and inherited the monolitic architecture, similar to \sendmail's. But having no separation of the individual components of the system, like \name{qmail} and \name{postfix} have, did not hurt. Its security is comparably good. %fixme: ref
   1.130 +
   1.131 +\name{exim} is highly configurable, especially in the field of mail policies. This makes it easy to specify how mail is routed through the system and who is allowed to send email to whom. Also interfaces for integration of virus and spam check programs are provided by design. %fixme: ref
   1.132 +
   1.133 +The program is \freesw, released under the \GPL. The latest stable version is 4.69 from December 2007.
   1.134 +
   1.135 +One finds \name{exim} on its homepage \citeweb{exim:homepage}. More information about it can be retrieved from \citeweb{wikipedia:exim} and \citeweb{jdebp}.
   1.136 +
   1.137 +
   1.138 +
   1.139 +\subsubsection*{\name{qmail}}
   1.140  \label{sec:qmail}
   1.141 -\name{qmail} is seen by its community as ``a modern SMTP server which makes sendmail obsolete''. It was written by Daniel~J.\ Bernstein starting in 1995. His primary goal was to create a secure \MTA\ to replace the popular, but vulnerable, \sendmail.
   1.142 +\name{qmail} is seen by its community as ``a modern SMTP server which makes sendmail obsolete''.%fixme: ref
   1.143 +It was written by Daniel~J.\ Bernstein starting in 1995. His primary goal was to create a secure \MTA\ to replace the popular, but vulnerable, \sendmail. %fixme: ref
   1.144  
   1.145 -\name{qmail} first introduced may innovative concepts in \mta\ design and is generally seen as the first security-aware \MTA\ developed.
   1.146 +\name{qmail} first introduced many innovative concepts in \mta\ design and is generally seen as the first security-aware \MTA\ developed. %fixme:ref
   1.147 +%fixme: what about mmdf?
   1.148  
   1.149  Since November 2007, \name{qmail} is released in the \name{public domain} which makes it \freesw. The latest release is 1.03 from July 1998.
   1.150  
   1.151  The programs homepages are \citeweb{qmail:homepage1} and \citeweb{qmail:homepage2}. Further information about \name{qmail} is available on \citeweb{lifewithqmail}, \citeweb{wikipedia:qmail} and \citeweb{jdebp}.
   1.152  
   1.153  
   1.154 -\subsection*{\name{postfix}}
   1.155 +
   1.156 +\subsubsection*{\name{postfix}}
   1.157  \label{sec:postfix}
   1.158  The \name{postfix} project was started in 1999 at \name{IBM research}, then called \name{VMailer} or \name{IBM Secure Mailer}. Wietse Venema's program ``attempts to be fast, easy to administer, and secure. The outside has a definite Sendmail-ish flavor, but the inside is completely different.''\citeweb{postfix:homepage} In fact, \name{postfix} was mainly designed after qmail's architecture to gain security. But in contrast to \name{qmail} it aims much more on being fast and full-featured.
   1.159  
   1.160 @@ -103,103 +134,57 @@
   1.161  Additional information is available on the program's homepage \citeweb{postfix:homepage}, on \citeweb{jdebp} and \citeweb{wikipedia:postfix}.
   1.162  
   1.163  
   1.164 -\subsection*{\name{exim}}
   1.165 -\label{sec:exim}
   1.166 -\name{exim} was started in 1995 by Philip Hazel at the \name{University of Cambridge}. Its age is about the same as \name{qmail}'s, but the architecture is totally different.
   1.167 -
   1.168 -While \name{qmail} took a completely new approach, \name{exim} forked of \name{smail-3}, and therefor is monolitic like that and like \sendmail. But having no separation of the individual components of the system, like \name{qmail} and \name{postfix} have, did not hurt. Its security is comparably good.
   1.169 -
   1.170 -\name{exim} is highly configurable, especially in the field of mail policies. This makes it easy to specify how mail is routed through the system and who is allowed to send email to whom. Also interfaces for integration of virus and spam check programs are provided by design.
   1.171 -
   1.172 -The program is \freesw, released under the \GPL. The latest stable version is 4.69 from December 2007.
   1.173 -
   1.174 -One finds \name{exim} on its homepage \citeweb{exim:homepage}. More information about it can be retrieved from \citeweb{wikipedia:exim} and \citeweb{jdebp}.
   1.175 -
   1.176 -
   1.177  
   1.178  
   1.179  
   1.180  
   1.181  \section{Comparison of \MTA{}s}
   1.182  
   1.183 -% http://shearer.org/MTA_Comparison
   1.184 -% http://www.geocities.com/mailsoftware42/
   1.185 -% http://fanf.livejournal.com/50917.html
   1.186 -% http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/postfix/2006-07/1762.html
   1.187 -% http://www.oreillynet.com/lpt/a/6849
   1.188 -% http://www.mailradar.com/mailstat/
   1.189 +<< general fact in table \ref{tab:mta-comparison} >>
   1.190  
   1.191 -\subsection{First release}
   1.192 -sendmail: 1983
   1.193 +\begin{table}
   1.194 +\begin{tabular}[hbt]{| p{0.13\textwidth} || p{0.13\textwidth} | p{0.13\textwidth} | p{0.13\textwidth} | p{0.13\textwidth} | p{0.13\textwidth} |}
   1.195 +\hline
   1.196  
   1.197 -postfix: 1999
   1.198 +              & sendmail & exim & qmail & postfix & masqmail \\
   1.199 +\hline \hline
   1.200 +First release & 1983 & 1995 & 1996 & 1999 & 1999 \\
   1.201 +\hline
   1.202 +Lines of code (with sloccount on debian packages)& 93k & 54k & 18k & 92k & 14k \\
   1.203 +\hline
   1.204 +Architecture & monolitic & monolitic & modular & modular & monolitic \\
   1.205 +\hline
   1.206 +Design goals & flexibility & general, flexible \& extensive facilities for checking & security & performance and security & for non-permanent internet connection \\
   1.207 +\hline
   1.208 +Market share (by Bernstein in 2001) & 42\% & 1.6\% & 17\% & 1.6\% & (unknown) \\
   1.209 +\hline
   1.210  
   1.211 -qmail: 1996 (first beta 0.70), 1997 (first general 1.0)
   1.212 +\end{tabular}
   1.213 +\caption{Comparison of MTAs}
   1.214 +\label{tab:mta-comparison}
   1.215 +\end{table}
   1.216  
   1.217 -exim: 1995
   1.218  
   1.219 -masqmail: 1999
   1.220 +\subsection{about market share}
   1.221  
   1.222 -exchange: 1993
   1.223 +\subsection{About architecture}
   1.224  
   1.225 +\subsection{Security comparision}
   1.226  
   1.227 -\subsection{Lines of code (with sloccount on debian packages)}
   1.228 -sendmail: 93k
   1.229  
   1.230 -postfix: 92k
   1.231 +\url{http://shearer.org/MTA_Comparison}
   1.232  
   1.233 -qmail: 18k
   1.234 +\url{http://www.geocities.com/mailsoftware42/}
   1.235  
   1.236 -exim: 54k
   1.237 +\url{http://fanf.livejournal.com/50917.html}
   1.238  
   1.239 -masqmail: 14k
   1.240 +\url{http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/postfix/2006-07/1762.html}
   1.241  
   1.242 -exchange: (no source available)
   1.243 +\url{http://www.oreillynet.com/lpt/a/6849}
   1.244  
   1.245 +\url{http://www.mailradar.com/mailstat/}
   1.246  
   1.247 -\subsection{Architecture}
   1.248 -sendmail: monolitic
   1.249  
   1.250 -postfix: modular
   1.251 -
   1.252 -qmail: modular
   1.253 -
   1.254 -exim: monolitic
   1.255 -
   1.256 -masqmail: monolitic
   1.257 -
   1.258 -Like its anchestor \sendmail, \masqmail\ is a monolitic program. It consists of only one \emph{setuid root}\footnote{Runs as user root, no matter which user invoked it.}\index{setuid root} binary file, named \path{masqmail}. All functionality is included in it; of course some more comes from dynamic libraries linked.
   1.259 -
   1.260 -
   1.261 -exchange: (unknown)
   1.262 -
   1.263 -
   1.264 -\subsection{Design goals}
   1.265 -sendmail: flexibility
   1.266 -
   1.267 -postfix: performance and security
   1.268 -
   1.269 -qmail: security
   1.270 -
   1.271 -exim: general, flexible \& extensive facilities for checking
   1.272 -
   1.273 -masqmail: for non-permanent internet connection
   1.274 -
   1.275 -exchange: groupware
   1.276 -
   1.277 -
   1.278 -\subsection{Market share (by Bernstein in 2001)}
   1.279 -sendmail: 42\%
   1.280 -
   1.281 -postfix: 1.6\%
   1.282 -
   1.283 -qmail: 17\%
   1.284 -
   1.285 -exim: 1.6\%
   1.286 -
   1.287 -masqmail: (unknown)
   1.288 -
   1.289 -exchange: 18\%
   1.290  
   1.291  
   1.292  
   1.293 @@ -239,9 +224,18 @@
   1.294  
   1.295  
   1.296  
   1.297 -% from the practice of programming
   1.298 -% names: are they good?
   1.299 -% check the significant number of characters. (intern: 31char, extern: 6char caseless; ProgC p.184)
   1.300 +<< from the practice of programming: are the names good? check the significant number of characters. (intern: 31char, extern: 6char caseless; ProgC p.184) >>
   1.301  
   1.302  
   1.303 +---
   1.304  
   1.305 +But for example delivery of mail to local users is \emph{not} what \mta{}s should care about, although most \MTA\ are able to deliver mail, and many do. (\name{mail delivery agents}, like \name{procmail} and \name{maildrop}, are the right programs for this job.)
   1.306 +
   1.307 +
   1.308 +protocols like \NAME{SMTP} and \NAME{UUCP}, between which mail is transfered.\footnote{\sendmail{}'s initial purpose was moving mail between \NAME{UUCP}, \NAME{SMTP}, and \name{Berknet}.}
   1.309 +
   1.310 +
   1.311 +---
   1.312 +
   1.313 +
   1.314 +Like its anchestor \sendmail, \masqmail\ is a monolitic program. It consists of only one \emph{setuid root}\footnote{Runs as user root, no matter which user invoked it.}\index{setuid root} binary file, named \path{masqmail}. All functionality is included in it; of course some more comes from dynamic libraries linked.