Re: [SM-USERS] Sendmail vs. SMTP - - pros, cons?

[Alan in T. <Ala...@fi...>]

On 9/26/06, Paul Lesniewski <pa...@sq...> wrote:

> On 9/26/06, WJCarpenter <bil...@ca...> wrote:
> > > Can anyone provide some comparison between Sendmail and SMTP for
> > > sending outgoing mail from the server? Are there advantages of one
> > > over the other, or disadvantages? Are there reasons why I should use
> > > one rather than the other for SquirrelMail?
> >
> > With sendmail, you probably get a mild efficiency improvement.
> >
> > With sendmail, you probably get a boatload of generally tolerable quirky
> > behavior.

Anything that would affect me as an SM user or SM administrator? (I am
not the server admin, which is run by my web host.)

I have been using SMTP for years, but yesterday I switched to Sendmail
because it seems to solve or at least workaround a problem that was
occurring when using SMTP.

> I am partial to SMTP because you get immediate feedback (on the
> compose screen) for some types (certainly not all) of errant mails

Agreed, that is a nice benefit, although not a "deal breaker" for me.

> SMTP is really nice if you do things like set up a specific port for
> your webmail senders in Postfix for which a different set of
> restrictions/filters is applicable compared to your outward-facing
> SMTP service/port.

I don't do any of that. I simply need a way for SquirrelMail to send
outgoing mail. Is there any reason I should avoid using Sendmail and
instead try to uncover the source of the problem so that I can return
to using SMTP? Or for my use, is Sendmail just as good as SMTP?

Thanks guys.