Using Exchange instead of IIS as a relay server
Melpa
At the moment, we have many applications that need to send SMTP mail
for application notifications, alerts, reporting etc.
We have a set up where the application sends to a dedicated Windows
2003 IIS relay server, which then forwards the mail on.
SMTP connections to this IIS relay server are locked down by IP
address to prevent it being used as an open relay.
We are investigating using a dedicated Exchange 2003 server instead of
IIS for this relay functionality.
Does anyone have any knowledge of benefits/disadvantages of using
Exchange 2003 as this sort of relay (it would locked down by IP as
well) instead of using IIS...would it be better or worse than using
IIS? I thought Exchange 2003 used IIS SMTP anyway?
All servers run Windows 2003 Server.
Sanford Whiteman
Yep.
I'd just just keep your current setup. There's no net advantage to
purchasing + running the bulky Exchange services (or installing them but
leaving them stopped) on a machine that's to be used for this purpose.
Exchange does extend IIS SMTP with a GUI queue viewer, which is handy, but
IMO not worth enough on balance.
-- Sandy
------------------------------------
Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist
Broadleaf Systems, a division of
Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc.
------------------------------------
Grant Taylor
> Does anyone have any knowledge of benefits/disadvantages of using
> Exchange 2003 as this sort of relay (it would locked down by IP as
> well) instead of using IIS...would it be better or worse than using
> IIS? I thought Exchange 2003 used IIS SMTP anyway?
I agree with Sandy, stick with what you have.
There are only a couple of things that (immediately) come to mind that
might make Exchange better than IIS, 1) SMTP connectors /might/ work
better in some situations, and 2) IIS's NNTP service is a P.I.T.A. to
administer compared to Exchange's GUI.
Unless you want / need the end user collaboration features of Exchange,
stick with IIS's SMTP service.