Timo Sirainen schreef:
On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 09:50 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2/23/2009 9:21 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Sun, 2009-02-22 at 23:58 -0800, Linux Advocate wrote:
2. What is the benefit of using Dovecot's SASL as compared to Cyrus SASL? Is
there better performance?
Probably not, but I've always hated configuring Cyrus SASL. It's not as
flexible and the error and debug messages are worse.
I agree... but the one disadvantage to dovecot sasl is it cannot be used
as CLIENT mechanism... is adding this capability by any chance on the radar?
Well, as a client Cyrus SASL does pretty well already. And having
Dovecot support also client SASL would require a lot of new code which
isn't used by Dovecot itself anywhere.
It could however be used in the test suite somewhere, e.g. to test the
SASL mechanisms themselves. So it would have some merit :)
Regards,
--
Stephan Bosch
step...@rename-it.nl
