Sending mail to multiple servers

[gerryw]

Hello All,

I need to setup a second mail server that is a mirror of the primary. I would like to have each email that arrives at the gateway forwarded to both servers. Can this be done?

Thanks,
Gerry

 

[dietmar]

No, that is not possible.

 

[gerryw]

Hi,

Sorry to hear that. I've come to like your software very much. I just need a simple smtp routing function. Possible future feature ? ;-)

Thanks,
Gerry

 

[dietmar]

I just need a simple smtp routing function.

Proxmox Mailgateway implements quite complex SMTP routing tables (Configuration/MailProxy/Transports).

You requested a totally unrelated feature - 'duplicate all traffic'. Proxmox does many test at SMTP level, and also rejects mails on SMTP protocol level. It simply makes no sense to send a copy of all those spam messages to another host.

- Dietmar

 

[gerryw]

Hi Dietmar,

I think maybe I was unclear. I was needing the ability to route incoming mail to multiple mail servers, not outgoing mail to multiple servers. This would mean the ability to specify more than one host/ip per domain. I think this is under the Mail Proxy/Transports tab.

Thanks,
Gerry

 

[dietmar]

This would mean the ability to specify more than one host/ip per domain. I think this is under the Mail Proxy/Transports tab.

You cannot 'duplicate' mails - i.e. there is exactly one transport for each destination (not two or more).

 

[gerryw]

Hi,

> You requested a totally unrelated feature...

Ok... I understand clearly that the Proxmox product does not support this feature. I was speaking to the comment above. My intention was not to create a problem or annoy anyone. There are several products in the same space that do exactly what I'm talking about. The only reason I mention this is, that I got the impression that it was somehow a foolish or stupid idea.

1. I have been using the Proxmox VE product for some time now. I like it very much.

2. I would rather spend money to support the smaller companies that the big corps.

3. I figured that the Proxmox mail gateway product would be of the same high quality that the Proxmox VE product is.

4. I only ask about a possible feature, because of all of the above and the possibility that it might have been something that you were already considering. I didn't really expect anyone to run to their desk and start coding.

5. If you don't want to implement such a feature, just say so. It's fine. It is most certainly your choice. Although, I am a little disappointed by the dialog.

Thanks,
Gerry

 

[martin]

Hi,

> You requested a totally unrelated feature...

Ok... I understand clearly that the Proxmox product does not support this feature. I was speaking to the comment above. My intention was not to create a problem or annoy anyone. There are several products in the same space that do exactly what I'm talking about. The only reason I mention this is, that I got the impression that it was somehow a foolish or stupid idea.

1. I have been using the Proxmox VE product for some time now. I like it very much.

2. I would rather spend money to support the smaller companies that the big corps.

3. I figured that the Proxmox mail gateway product would be of the same high quality that the Proxmox VE product is.

4. I only ask about a possible feature, because of all of the above and the possibility that it might have been something that you were already considering. I didn't really expect anyone to run to their desk and start coding.

5. If you don't want to implement such a feature, just say so. It's fine. It is most certainly your choice. Although, I am a little disappointed by the dialog.

Thanks,
Gerry

Just to make clear. Its not that we don´t like you . Its just impossible to add such a feature as the mail gateway uses several filter methods which are 100 % incompatible in such a configuration.

Proxmox Mail Gateway is a very stable and widely used solution since more than 5 years. One reason for success is that we only add useful and reliable features.

based on our long term experience with all type of email systems you will get a lot of problems if you try to do such duplication and I strongly suggest you check if this is really what you want - about which competitor do you talk here?

 

[gerryw]

Hi,

I totally understand. If it's not a proper fit, then you certainly would not be wise to risk the stability and quality of your product. It is exactly those things that made me like your products to begin with.

I'm no smtp expert by any means, but I don't really understand the techincal issue. I would think that sending incoming mail to a particular host would be done after all of the various processing/filtering rules have already been applied. It seems to be the way the other gateways work. The last step is to get the mail handler(s) for the domain. In the case of multiple handlers, they just deliver the message to both. Anyway, I appreciate that you took the time to explain this to me.

> about which competitor do you talk here?

Let's see... there is IronPort, Astaro, and a few others that aren't coming to mind at the moment. We narrowed it down to those two and have been evaluating both products. I think we had six in the original list. It's been a little while since we did the search.

Thanks,
Gerry

 

[dietmar]

I'm no smtp expert by any means, but I don't really understand the techincal issue. I would think that sending incoming mail to a particular host would be done after all of the various processing/filtering rules have already been applied. It seems to be the way the other gateways work.

Well, thats the functionality of the BCC object we have - simply send an BCC to someone - if that is what you want?

- Dietmar

 

[tom]

Hi,

I totally understand. If it's not a proper fit, then you certainly would not be wise to risk the stability and quality of your product. It is exactly those things that made me like your products to begin with.

I'm no smtp expert by any means, but I don't really understand the techincal issue. I would think that sending incoming mail to a particular host would be done after all of the various processing/filtering rules have already been applied. It seems to be the way the other gateways work. The last step is to get the mail handler(s) for the domain. In the case of multiple handlers, they just deliver the message to both. Anyway, I appreciate that you took the time to explain this to me.

> about which competitor do you talk here?

Let's see... there is IronPort, Astaro, and a few others that aren't coming to mind at the moment. We narrowed it down to those two and have been evaluating both products. I think we had six in the original list. It's been a little while since we did the search.

Thanks,
Gerry

Just to make clear: in your first post you requested to have ALL incoming smtp traffic duplicated. now you talk about to send emails AFTER filtering to a second internal server - this is very different from the first post!

 

[gerryw]

Hello All,

I think there is some confusion here. I still think my original post says the same thing, but it seems that is not how it was interpreted. I'm going to give it another try. Maybe a step by step description would be more clear.

Let's assume we have a one Proxmox mail gateway receiving Internet mail for mydomain.com and two internal mail servers which handle mail for mydomain.com

1. Proxmox receives email from Internet addressed to mydomain.com
2. Proxmox gateway processes the email and decides it can be delivered
3. Proxmox gateway looks up the internal server that handles mydomain.com
4. Proxmox gaeway finds that there are two internal servers that handle mail for mydomain.com.
5. Proxmox gateway connects to the first internal server and delivers the email.
6. Proxmox gateway connects to the second internal email server and delivers the email.
7. Done.

I'm sorry there has been some confusion, but the above is what I've been talking about all along.

Thanks,
Gerry

 

[dietmar]

As mentioned above, you can use the BCC object to send a copy to another account (including information about the original mail). Some mail archive providers use this feature.

But sending mail twice at smtp level is not possible (we use postfix as MTA, and postfix does not have such feature).

- Dietmar

 

[gerryw]

Hi,

Thanks. There actually may be a possibility of using the BCC feature. I've come up with a scenario for the customer that would make use of this. It would also be a much more cost effective solution. We'll see what happens.

I appreciate your patience in working through this.

Thanks,
Gerry

 

[tobiasfonsmark]

I have a similar question, which seems highly relevant, and for which I cannot find an answer in the documentation nor in this forum.

I recently upgraded a customers Proxmox server to HA with 2 nodes. The customer also want to use fail over (and maybe simpel loadbalancing) when Proxmox delivers incomming mails to their Domino (or Exchange) cluster.

The setup of transports in Proxmox only allows 1 IP or hostname for each domain.

What is the best way to achieve this? Will a simple DNS roundrobin solution (eg. 2 IP's for the same hostname) work?

 

[dietmar]

Will a simple DNS roundrobin solution (eg. 2 IP's for the same hostname) work?

Yes.

 

[dietmar]

You can even define an MX record (with priorities) for the transport.

 

[tobiasfonsmark]

You can even define an MX record (with priorities) for the transport.

OK. That sounds great. I cannot find info about this in the documentation.

Will I need a special (non public) DNS-server for the MX-solution to work?

 

[masterx]

I'll pick this one up after 11 years, LOL

I'm in the same situation as tobiasfonsmark and I guess I'll use our internal DNS servers for proxmox and define mx records there which point to the internal mail hosts, right? So every domain handled by proxmox which needs redundancy here will need corresponding mx records on the internal dns, correct?

It'd be really nice if proxmox could handle that internally but I guess I'll be ok with the described solution as well.

great software so far, thanks for making this.

 

[b.reiter]

Bump...

We have the same requirement: Multiple internal servers which should be tried for mail delivery for HA purposes. The A/MX override via internal DNS does not work for us, since it breaks DNSSEC. Is there a way by now to solve this through the transport configuration? Thanks!