Erbil KARAMAN: >> actually 'letting MTA figure out how to get it to the internet' is not >> a great approach for high volume senders.
I meant just in terms of letting the primary postfix instance figure out which other postfix instance to pass it to. It's a good generalised solution that doesn't require mailing software that's smart enough to send via different instances. I mention this as being useful because if, like one of our customers, you sell a service that lets them relay mail via your MTA, you can give everyone a single entry point and let the MTA do what you want it to do. >> you want to control 'logically' that no MTA out there supports. If you >> compare the config options of powerMTA and postfix you will see how >> they differ as a delivery agent. i wish i had time to implement all >> those features and more on postfix, but after investigating a little >> bit seemed like a lot of work to me... because of that i usually use a >> software 'email sending engine' as an independent middleware to those >> MTAs.. > Wietse Venema wrote: > Can you be give examples of such features? Sure, I can think of a few. Selling points of PowerMTA: * Goodmail compliance/endorsement/whatever * Built-in DKIM/Domainkeys signing * Ability to define round-robin pools of src addresses for outgoing mail * Ability to associate sender-domains with one or more pools * Some amount of reporting/stats/things that marketing people like * Might have inbuilt support for "mail merge" type of campaigns In short, it makes some things easier, in an all-in-one turnkey e-solution that leverages your assets, letting you better synergise with your target demographic. Or something. :/ Oh, it's also meant to be high-performance, something I've done some testing on but haven't yet completed. The one instance we run for a customer has a ceiling of 1200 outgoing connections, which is does hit at times. It uses a 2(?) tier directory structure on the filesystem to help improve performance as well.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
