Chris,
I've replaced my qmail chain for SASL delivery with postfix. It took me
a few rounds to get all the bits I needed working, but I'm good with the
results.
The non-SASL chain will be a big nut to crack. There are a lot of
useful spam features in spamdyke that I haven't found an equivalent for
in postfix. For example, spamdyke can find an ip address buried in the
fqdn and check if it matches the sending MTA's ip address. This can be
done for the domains you specify. I have the one spamdyke option turned
on to do this against all country code domains. I also have a list of
about 60 other domains to do this against.
If it weren't for spamdyke, I wouldn't have an issue but Sam Clippinger
did an impressive job at making an open source anti-spam tool
specifcally for qmail that beats anything else I've seen.
As for the dot-qmail stuff. I've moved away from that quite awhile ago
except for my mailing lists which I don't have a problem shutting down.
Gary
On 4/25/12 10:42 AM, Christopher Chan wrote:
On 24/04/12 09:30 PM, Gary Gendel wrote:
The pipeline architecture of qmail has been instrumental at making
third-party additions incredibly simple. You can easily plug in special
debugging modules, and even tee off things so you can test new modules
in parallel with real operations. Before spamdyke was available, I had
developed a number of homebrew modules for spam analysis and control.
That said, qmail isn't 100% sendmail compatible, so occasionally I ran
into issues with unhandled sendmail options (until patched). I don't
know whether postfix suffers from the same issue yet.
postfix will be fine with sendmail options. postfix also support
milters and you can use something like mimedefang to do the same
although you will have write from scratch or go hunting.
Since my Qmail based system does not inherently support IPV6 and would
require significant patching I'm committed to move to Postfix before
this becomes necessary. However, Postfix configuration is far more
complex if you are someone that likes to understand the purpose of each
option and it's impact to other options. I will also miss the simplicity
of making a split-horizon caching DNS service via dnscache/tinydns when
I need to go to IPV6 which is an important piece of any email system in
a private networked LAN.
postfix configuration is only complex because it offers more than
qmail. If someone were to look at your setup, it would be complex for
them too in the beginning.
djbdns has a ipv6 patch available. Unless you need dnssec, i don't see
why one needs to move off djbdns. But qmail or any patched ones is
another story. Just the need to stop qmail-send to do any queue
management is reason enough not to use qmail for incoming.
Gary
On 4/24/12 8:44 AM, låzaro wrote:
anyway... postfix is the better today :D
I saw using Qmail long time ago, I like it, but is obsolete
Also, I have my compiled Qmail and configured just as "personal email
museum"
Thread name: "Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Qmail-to-go on openindiana?"
Mail number: 17
Date: Tue, Apr 24, 2012
In reply to: Christopher Chan<christopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk>
On Monday, April 23, 2012 08:44 PM, låzaro wrote:
in Qmail, the security is patch-maked in postfix is by-design-maked
NO, that is not accurate. "security" where it means anti-spam, DJB
did not bother because as far as he is concerned, the way things
are, things are just broken. Too bad his idea of how email should
work never took off. So any anti-spam features are provided by
THIRD-PARTIES. It is not 'patch-maked'. There is zero anti-spam.
As for postfix, 'by-design-maked' just means Wietse put in the time
to develop postfix unlike DJB who stopped in 1998.
for example, smtp auth, SASL, TLS and soon. Also postfix is more
modular. You can use it with someSQL LDAP and all thats cute things.
There is a qmail fork that does both sql and ldap too. postfix is
only better because its developer continued to work on the code and
keep up with the times and he built a good reputation while at it.
No qmail fork has ever managed that because of DJB's stand on
licensing but now that qmail is public domain, maybe in the future
one of these forks might.
_______________________________________________
OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
_______________________________________________
OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
_______________________________________________
OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
_______________________________________________
OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
