On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 02:46:22PM +0100, Paul Tansom wrote:
On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 11:02 +0100, Chris Green wrote: information can be lost or not used in the process. The main situation I've come across here is when an email is sent to multiple recipients at the same domain and it is all collected via fetchmail. Generally only one will see the email without some extra form of intervention. If everything is coming into a single mailbox then there is probably little practical difference in the two methods (except you may not get two copies of a message if you have it sent to you at two addresses).
I doubt I'll have a problem with that, there are only three or four users and I can't imagine a situation where the same mail will get sent to more than one of them.
[snip]
Limiting the IP addresses that can talk to your mail server certainly ties things down nicely, and I would personally opt for SMTP, but at the same time most of my current mail setups use fetchmail at the moment! This is partly due to current and legacy issues with dynamic IP addresses (and I've never bothered to sort out the SMTP pull setup that Demon use where you notify the SMTP server that you are on line and what your IP address is so it can start delivery - can't remember the acronym off the top of my head).
Do you mean ETRN? Though I thought Demon (I was with them) used something that wasn't ETRN because they had to invent it in the days before POP3 existed even. (... or is it SDPS)
I am in the process of switching over to SMTP myself, but then I run a business off my connection as well as having around 10 - 15 domains to support in various ways (not all on the ADSL connection for all functions, some only backup/development services). My system will also be working with a mail relay in a DMZ that will handle filtering and a few low volume mailing lists.
Thinking about it I will probably stay with fetchmail as some of the mail has to be fetchmail and I might as well just go for an easy life and get it all that way.