Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, 2006-08-30 at 17:04 -0400, William L. Maltby wrote:
I see flames!!!
I wish I could find an UNBIASED comparison of the main MTA's. I just seem to find ones that slant to the one that just happens to be used by the writer.
Not possible? Those who bother to reply have probably had a variety of experience and settled on what they thought was best for their situation. For them to express anything other than recommendations (mostly) for their selection would be .. illogical ... Kirk!
The problem is that MTA's typically have to mesh with a lot of other tools, so you'll see people raving about one vs. the other because of some almost-unrelated management wrapper or it's ability to do SMTP AUTH against some oddball password database. Also, if you are looking for long experience, sendmail is pretty much the only one that has been around for what I'd call a long time - but you can't really compare its capabilities before the milter interface stabilized with the current version. A lot of people got things working with qmail or postfix and haven't looked at the new capabilities of sendmail with MimeDefang as a milter.
maybe because they don't like the idea of perl as an inbetween. how large are your sendmail processes?
sendmail's fork a process per connection + perl in some situations make people have nightmares whereas the same could be done in a much more efficient manner especially with postfix. Most probably won't think of mysql as an oddball password database. Maybe a cdb one.
sendmail + mimedefang is overrated. Now that postfix 2.3 is the stable line now...postfix + mimedefang will probably be interesting depending on how it is done...