3 ms·
As with most things, it depends on your use case. Except for some very high-volume or ancient features, it has pretty much everything. However, unlike Postfix,
by paulnpace 4y ago
As with most things, it depends on your use case. Except for some very high-volume or ancient features, it has pretty much everything.
However, unlike Postfix, you can actually configure OpenSMTPD yourself without breaking it. Postfix suffers heavily from a Byzantium configuration that everyone is copy-pasting because understanding how to create a configuration from scratch requires man-months of reading their docs.
The biggest downside to OpenSMTPD is the portable version is weakly supported, so it's only useful if you are running it on OpenBSD, which is a shame, really, because it's probably what most people would prefer if they could run it on their preferred OS.
- phsau 4y agoWe run Postfix at a large, high-volume scale and I can confirm OpenSMTPD does not have the feature/configuration set to work as a replacement. Postfix is great in this regard because it has near endless configurability, but it comes at the cost of complexity.
- paulnpace 4y ago> We run Postfix at a large, high-volume scale At the other end of the spectrum, Postfix is incredible - it's FOSS, and it does all that.
- ok123456 4y agoI remember when postfix was the "easier" MTA software meant to replace Sendmail and all of its m4 macros for rules. Getting Sendmail to do anything other than be a completely open relay was not easy.
- Beltalowda 4y agoCompared to that sendmail.cf and M4 macros that would generate it almost anything is "easy".