OT: building new server, need MTA advice

[Glenn Steen]

On 30/01/07, Peter Russell <pete at enitech.com.au> wrote:
>
>
> Glenn Steen wrote:
> > On 30/01/07, Chris Yuzik <itdept at fractalweb.com> wrote:
> >> Peter Russell wrote:
> >> > Dont forget to mention that postfix cannot and probably never will be
> >> > able to split emails that are addressed to multiple recipients into
> >> > multiple queue files, so you the one email can be subject to various
> >> > rules, depending on who it was addressed to.
> >> Hmmm. That's interesting. And this is something that Sendmail does now?
> >> Or does Sendmail need to be hacked to support this?
> >>
> >> I don't think we're really doing any of this now, and am not sure how
> >> important this feature would be. Anyone else doing this?
> >>
> >> Chris
> > Not really interresting, no. It isn't true.
> > Postfix can do this, but does it at delivery, so one has to "fake" a
> > delivery via a dual instance setup and a transport map... It is all in
> > the wiki (both MAQ and my specific page), when/if you need it.
> > Pete has been telling us/me this cannot be done, although I've had a
> > box running with that ever since I wrote the page (and told Pete about
> > it, IIRC). Don't know why... Maybe he didn't get it to work or
> > somesuch.
> >
> This is true you did show me and i havent done it. But i extend my
> thanks again. :) Because, i dont want to run 2 instances of postfix
> again. I am too cautious about making changes to want to affect every
> single message to achieve it.
>
> Another way is to set #smtpd_recipient_limit = 1 but this creates
> performance issues.
That would be truly bad.

> Anyway i wasnt trying to make a big deal out of it, only suggesting that
> it is something i would consider if was choosing the MTA for a new
> installation. If it was me starting again, i would choose Exim - based
> on my limited understanding of the features of these softwares.
>
>
Well, if one is to set things up from scratch, why then setting it up
like this is
a) harmless, since there is no preexisting system to "upset":-)
b) not that hard, sure it might look much, but... I opted for
"detailed" instead of "salespersonlike";-)
c) not hugely expensive.... If you run MS and particularly SA on every
message, the overhead of the second instance is _nothing_. It was
never performance that made us abandon the defer method;). And
splitting is "expensive" for all MTAs, so ...

Anyway, I too would consider Exim very carefully. They all have their
strengths/weaknesses, and none of them are truey a bad choice, AFAICS.

If I were to leave my current employer, I'd seel them DefenderMX,
probably "applianced"... Which would mean Sendmail.
But they have me, and I'm comfy with PF, so ... There I will remain:-).

Cheers
-- 
-- Glenn
email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com
work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se