Bug#410756: exim4 default config utterly useless for 98% of users

[prosolutions at gmx.net]

One way I could envision it being would be like this:

First debconf question: "Please choose a level of configuration.  For
most users setting up mail to work with their ISP's mail server the
"Simple" method should be sufficient.  Choose "Advanced" if you are
setting up your own mailer or intend to do things like mail relaying.

Choosing "Simple" would then ask:

"Please enter the name of your provider's mail server"

   user enters mail.isp.com

   (At this point would it be a good idea to do a HELO or EHLO of the
    server to probe its capabilities?  If so, subsequent questions could
    be like "This server appears to support TLS encryption, should it be
    used?"  But based on your comment below it should use TLS if
    available.  However, based on this doc:
    http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/280 it seemed that one
    has to create /etc/exim4/exim4.conf.localmacros and add
    "MAIN_TLS_ENABLE = true" to it to get TLS.

    I do not know enough about CRAM-MD5 and the merits of using or not
    using it or other auth mechanisms, only that it would of course be
    preferable to have it used when TLS is not available.  I don't have
    any hard data about how many smarthosts don't support TLS but do support
    CRAM-MD5 but I think the number is high based on my experience.
    Again, this is all relative to whether TLS or an encrypted auth
    mechanism would simply be used if they are detected.

(after questions settling the use of TLS and auth method (if need to be
asked)
"Please enter the mail username for your provider"
"Please enter the password for this account"

At this point it would finish with a note to the effect "Exim should now
be configured to send mail.  If there are problems or you need to
configure it you can run "dpkg-reconfigure exim4-config" as root."


Re: having a more simply named command to access the configuration,
didn't Exim v.3 have it (eximconfig or something like that)?  Not sure 
why it did not continue with v.4.



Re: the "Hide local mail name in outgoing mail"  If this is answered "No" it is definitely a problem with gmx.net which will reject the mail.  This is the exact message:

======================================================================
SMTP error from remote mail server after MAIL FROM:<djo at maxi.alay.net>
SIZE=1562 AUTH=djo at maxi.alay.net:
    host mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]: 550 5.7.0 Sender address does not
belong to logged in user {mp030}

------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. ------

Return-path: <djo at maxi.alay.net>
Received: from djo by maxi.alay.net with local (Exim 4.63)
        (envelope-from <djo at maxi.alay.net>)
        id 1HGtWZ-0001Td-U4
        for prosolutions at gmx.net; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 01:00:31 -0800
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 01:00:31 -0800
From: Daniel <djo at alay.mine.nu>
To: prosolutions at gmx.net
Subject: test2
Message-ID: <20070213090031.GB5555 at maxi.alay.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
======================================================================

If I use the simple mail program nbsmtp to send mail (this is all it
does, just send mail through a smarthost) it sends correctly.  The
headers of a received message look like this (in comparison with above):

=======================================================================
>From djon777 at gmx.net  Tue Feb 13 00:57:49 2007
>From djo  Tue Feb 13 00:57:49 2007
Return-Path: djon777 at gmx.net
Delivered-To: GMX delivery to prosolutions at gmx.net
Received: from pop.gmx.net
        by maxi.alay.net with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.6)
        for <djo at localhost> (single-drop); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 00:57:49
-0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 13 Feb 2007 08:55:27 -0000
        46gw==
Received: by maxi (nbSMTP-1.01-cvs) for uid 1000
        (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256
bits))
        djon777 at gmx.net; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 00:55:52 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 00:55:30 -0800
From: Daniel <djon777 at gmx.net>
To: prosolutions at gmx.net
Subject: test
Message-ID: <20070213085049.GA5555 at maxi.alay.net>
Reply-To: Daniel <djon777 at gmx.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
===========================================================================

In the first instance of the failed message through Exim, the problem
stems from From: being djo at maxi.alay.net.  I'm not sure which of the 2
From:'s this is.  But with the successful send via nbsmtp there are:

>From djon777 at gmx.net
>From djo

I'm guessing the first one is the envelope from which is the important
one for the mail server, the second one is just my local username, which
apparently the GMX mail server doesn't care at all about.

Why isn't it possible for Exim to know that, if its sending an outgoing
message through a smarthost (as opposed to local mail) that it should
set the envelope From: accordingly?  In the instance that the mail is
local, then it should not have to do this.  In fact it would be
confusing if local mail had an envelope From: using the ISP's mailer
domain.

nbsmtp, as simple as it is, works every time with every ISP mailer, once
you know the server name, your credentials, and the type of auth
mechanism to use.  Why should Exim be more complicated than this for the
end user?

Getting back to the original debconf question "Hide local mail name in
outgoing mail" I think that it should not be necessary to ask this, as
nbsmtp, a much simpler program, does not have to ask it.



Regards,


--
Daniel O'Neill
prosolutions at gmx.net