>But how is that less resource intensive than having IMail deliver the SMTP >traffic directly?
1. Imail does no DNS lookups, but sends to ip of gateway. 2. Imail's SMTP processes dump a msg on the gateway at LAN speed, often under 2 secs vs 5 to 20 secs per for delivery to internet. 3. queue buildup on IMail is almost never, although Imail's screwy list server is still prone to get all tangled up within itself before it even gets out of the Imail box, no matter where the mail is going. but less so with an outbound gateway. 4. deferred mail and retries are moved from Imail to to the gateway. >IMail would still have to use SMTP to send the traffic >over to the qmail box, right? of course >It seems to me the same number of SMTP dialogs >and transactions would occur... but they occur MUCH faster, meaning IMail's SMTP processes are short lived, take up less memory. >Am I missing something? I originally planned to use the FreeBSD box for both >incoming and outgoing processing that's what IMgate users do. >, but I thought it all through and couldn't >see the advantage on the outgoing piece. (it is great for the incoming >pre-processing though). do it for outgoing, you�ll like it as much, esp if you have Imail list traffic. Len Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html to be removed from this list. An Archive of this list is available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
