On January 21, 2024 12:51:00 AM GMT+01:00, Michael Peddemors <mich...@linuxmagic.com> wrote: >On 2024-01-19 16:12, Peter wrote: >> On 20/01/24 12:28, Joe Acquisto wrote: >>> I noticed that many places in the documentation and in examples gleaned >>> from the wilderness, refer to the LDA protocol when discussing sieve. >>> >>> The documentation also mentions that lmtp is preferred over lda, and seems >>> to say in places that sieve will operate without issue in either case. >>> >>> Does it matter to sieve implementation if one uses only lmtp? >> >> LDA is older, think of LMTP as a more modern replacement. LDA has to launch >> a separate process and process one message at a time. LMTP maintains a >> running service and can stream multiple messages in a single connection, >> therefore LMTP is a lot more efficient. >> >> You will see a lot of bad advice on the internet, or old outdated advice. >> Tutorials that use LDA is an example of old, outdated advice. >> >> Sieve itself doesn't care which one you use, but there are other reasons to >> prefer LMTP. > >Just wish LMTP would not end up with duplicate Return-Path headers.. Duplicate return path headers? I don't see them on my system. All mail is sent from postfix to dovecot with lmtp
-- Christian Kivalo _______________________________________________ dovecot mailing list -- dovecot@dovecot.org To unsubscribe send an email to dovecot-le...@dovecot.org
