Sendmail replacements?

[John Brunn]

I can't say enough good things about exim.  I've been using it for about 2 
years now, and I've never had any problems.  Nothing against the other 
MTA's, but once I tried exim I never felt the need to use another one.  
Config file is extrememly easy to use, rewrites are cake...

www.exim.org has excellent documentation and is constantly being updated.  

We've gotten excellent throughput from our mail relays using it, getting 
well over 100k messages / day each.  However, exim uses the 
philosophy "95% of all mail can be delivered right away".  Therefore, it 
is optimized to send mail as soon as it gets it.  If you are expecting to 
have a large queue on the server (or mail that won't be able to be 
delivered for a while because of remote mail servers, etc) then I believe 
postfix or qmail might be a better choice.  However, for mail relays or 
an internal mail server, as i've stated before, i can't say enough good 
things about it.

As someone else stated, compiling exim is not a 2 minute job.  You have to 
look into the make file and compile in the options that you want.  But 
once you get it running, the configuration is easy.  My next step is 
compiling in spamassassin...

-John Brunn 

On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Rich Holland wrote:

> [Approved despite the HTML.  Sigh.   -- postmaster at baylisa.org]
> 
> It's been several years since I did any significant SMTP work, and now I
> find that I've got to configure a bunch of machines and a central hub to
> relay mail for the others.  My first thought was rewriting headers by
> changing the sendmail.cf file, but now that I think about it, this may
> be the time to replace sendmail with something "easier" or "better" or
> "more secure" but I'm out of touch with the state of the art in SMTP
> mailers.
> 
>  
> 
> Anyone have any suggestions?
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks!
> Rich
> 
>