> When  you  call outlook a "broken client" I assume you are referring
> to   inherent   design  flaws  in  it,  rather  than  any  setup  of
> configuration  error,  right?

Yes,  though  there may be some setting in Outlook (certainly far from
the  default) that "fixes" the broken queue processing logic. Possibly
some VBA would do it...have fun. :)

> Thanks for the info on multiple servers and DSN's. I guess this is just one
> more reason to have another front end server ahead of Imail.

Well,  not  exactly. Best practices would dictate that returning a 552
is perfectly acceptable behavior for a front-end server as well. You'd
be  setting up a non-optimal design, but at least it would work around
Outlook.

> I  assume  that something like IMgate would work for this as well as
> filling several other purposes?

IMGate/PostFix or any other MTA will do, but follow-on problem is that
you  won't be able to authenticate against the IMail userbase for SMTP
AUTH,  so  you'd  need  to  maintain separate userbases. You could use
POP3-before-SMTP instead, which Len has cookbooked for IMGate w/IMail.

I'm not sure that you want to open all of these cans of worms *before*
sending  a  mail  blast  to your clients and seeing if that calms down
these  incidents. Nobody benefits from such situations, so the clients
should  know  to  act  in  their  own interest as well (save their own
bandwidth, reduce endless/hopeless retries, etc.)

-Sandy


To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/

Reply via email to