iRedmail, small reliable, scalable and most of all totally free! Dave
-----Original Message----- From: ProFox [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ken Dibble Sent: 16 June 2016 19:34 To: [email protected] Subject: [NF] Linux SMTP/POP Servers? We've been running an internal email system that is built into the ClearOS operating system (a version of CentOS that functions as a SAMBA 3 domain controller) for many years. Along with the ClearOS SMTP/POP server, we've been running MailMan on the same machine to provide an internal listserv capability. Unfortunately, I'm going to have to discard ClearOS and go with a Windows AD domain server. I want to preserve the internal email and listserve functionality, and I want to run it on one of my new Linux Synology NAS clones. There are a bazillion options for replacements and I don't have any reliable basis on which to evaluate them. Do any of you have recommendations for Linux SMTP/POP server software that would be suitable for running an internal email system? By "suitable for running an internal email system" I mean: 1. The system will not/cannot/must not communicate with, or be seen from, the internet. The ClearOS SMTP/POP server is configured to only accept, and send, email within its own domain (though this may be achieved by tweaking Linux ports rather than directly within the email server, given the information provided in the next paragraph, I don't know). The host machine is behind a NATing router that does not have any open ports for email. I need an email server that can be configured in the same way. Related to this, I would prefer the ability to configure how the SMTP server responds to invalid input, including messages addressed to the internet or to invalid internal addresses. The ClearOS server tries to send these several times, at increasingly long intervals, so that it takes 3 or more days to put out a bounce-back message, and this configuration can't be changed. I would rather that bounce-backs take place immediately. 2. Must provide all standard POP3 functionality (thank you, but I am not looking for an explanation of why I should use IMAP instead), including the ability to communicate with a fat Windows email client that will sometimes tell it to retain email on the server for a period of time. 3. Free as in beer, preferably, but if not an option, then I would be willing to pay a reasonable one-time license fee, not based on the number of email accounts, for perpetual use. I am not willing to pay for a "software as service" arrangement. 4. Because it is an internal server with no connection to the internet, it does not have to have all of the high-paranoia-level security features that an internet email server needs. I will cope with it if it does not pemit plain text authentication, but plain text authentication is perfectly adequate and completely safe for my purposes. 5. It doesn't have to have any built-in spam filtering. The current CentOS SMTP/POP server has annoying spam filtering features that are buggy and can't be turned off. For example, zip file attachments (and sometimes docx and xlsx attachments, which are just zip files) go missing, and it can choke on other unusual file attachments. None of this nonsense is necessary and I would prefer for nothing to be built-in that filters spam or messes with attachments. If any such thing is built-in, it needs to be able to be turned off, and stay off. 6. If it doesn't integrate true listserv capabilities (no fudging with "aliases" or numerically-limited forwarding lists) like those of MailMan, then it needs to be compatible with MailMan. 7. Traffic requirements: I don't know much about what sort of resources a Linux SMTP/POP server requires. Currently we have about 120 email accounts, each with a 1 GB mailbox on the server, and the NAS will accommodate that without even blinking. Conceivably someday we could be looking at more like 250 accounts. To the extent to which that affects speed/responsiveness, then that's a consideration. 8. Easy to set up and configure, and if not, then EXTREMELY well- and reliably-documented. 9. <rant>Probably not an option, but, since I want an integrated SMTP/POP server, then, for the sake of the Mother of All that is Good, would it be too much to ask for an integrated validation system in which, just for laughs, the SMTP server simply compares the sender's address to the POP server's list of valid accounts for that domain to determine whether or not to accept and relay an incoming message, instead of performing bollocks-oriented "test sends" back to the user that will fail if the user's inbox, the state of which bears no rational relationship to the person's authorization, ability, or need, to use the SMTP server to SEND email, is full, and calling it "validation", which it is, emphatically, NOT?</rant> Thanks for all of your suggestions and the benefit of your experience. Ken Dibble www.stic-cil.org [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
