bump.

Excuse me, but I just can't understand why no one is interested in a feature like this.

Sometimes it happens that maybe I'm going down the wrong path and I would therefore like to have your opinion.

Hey Sabatino, 

Thanks for the feature request. I can see the utility of something like this. We already do something kinda like this with our Rotate IP List. Located in Settings->Protocols. The intention of this is if an IP is failing or timing out it will switch to a secondary IP address. I think it would be kinda cool to have a setting in Settings->General or something that makes it so it uses a gateway after a certain amount of failures. 

Can you please detail where exactly this feature would be placed and how you'd want it to function? After this, I will write up a feature request for this so that management can review it. For instance, would you want a whole tab in the settings menu dedicated just to SMTP routing rules? Then have something kinda like events where if an email fails on the first attempt the second attempt should use this IP or gateway. ETC?

Thanks, 

thanks zach, I was starting to feel crazy

Let's say that the required functions are 2, similar to each other, but substantially different.

Let's start with the first.

Use outbound gateway when direct sending fails.

as you rightly said, it would be nice to be able to set the number of direct attempts before trying with outbound gateway. In order to avoid using outbound gateway when it is not needed. I'm thinking for example of when the first send fails because the destination server has a greylist or because it is temporarily unreachable. I don't know if it is possible to distinguish between a hard error and a soft error. In short, let's say that he should use outbound gateway instead of doing the bounce.

I imagine this setting both at the single domain level and at the server level as a general setting. which could then be a single outbound gateway or round robin

Here is a domain settings level image that I would expect

The other issue instead concerns the routing rules which I imagine as a real routing rules menu which must act at the SMTP and delivery level.

Here the rule should allow you to set.

if the sender is @domain.tld and the recipient is @outlook.com use this outbound gateway

This thing is different from the previous one.

Imagine that Outlook has blocked our server's IP. There is no point in triggering the use outbound gateway rule when direct delivery fails. Better not to attempt new submissions until resolution.

Furthermore, these rules can also be used in other contexts and for other purposes.

Considering that outbound gateways are often paid, using them sparingly and in case of emergency would be the best thing.

The possibility of using regular expressions should also be included in the rules.

These two options would make SM a complete system in my opinion

Hey Sabatino, 

Thank you for the suggestions. I think that this would be a good addition to SmarterMail too. I have escalated this internally for our product management team's approval. 

Have a good rest of your week. 

Thanks, 

I like it too. Routing logic like this would be reserved for wacky/non-standard configurations, or emergency backup delivery but it's still something that could be useful in specific situations.

That is awesome to hear Sabatino, we're happy to have you along for the ride!

I have the same feeling as Sabatino: I believe that SmarterMail is an excellent product and for this reason we are slowly abandoning MailEnable, Exchange and Kerio in favor of SmarterMail...

However, some features that are normal in other products but are missing with SmarterMail (see some of my other posts in the forum and Sabatino's post above) are holding us back with some particular customers (at the moment we have around 190 customers migrated to SM, but we have also another 150 or so on other systems that, for now, we don't trust ourselves to migrate...).

SmarterMail is slowly improving and adding more and more features, I'm sure that little by little it will be complete and then we can say we have the best mail server!!!

...I think we're pretty close...

Keep up the good work (and also please continue to listen to our requests and suggestions!)

We'd love to use SM for our outbound gateways, but postfix just does a better job, especially with IP rotation. Postfix's extensibility is way beyond what SM can do, maybe in time though!

I wanted to add that I checked that Exchange also has routing rules

echoDreamz  

I'm sure that postfix does many more things.

But SM should still be able to be independent at least with the necessary functions.

I'm fighting so hard to have the routing rules because it's about protecting the server. To date, MS in particular often bans our servers for no valid reason and then doesn't even bother responding to support emails.

Having a mechanism for failover via an outbound gateway is essential in my opinion.

I don't have to be forced to have another server like postfix to get this done.

It should be added that on small servers the administration of SM + the postfix gateway is still challenging. Log analysis then becomes even more complex.

Among other things, I would really like to have delivery reports at user level. Let me explain: webmail allows the user to know the status of the message he has sent:

1) Queued

2) delivered to the destination server

And this function would only be possible if SM is the delivery gateway or at most if the delivery gateway is another SM

To date, every time someone has a problem that could be solved with routing rules I highlight it, in order to make the advantages clear.

For example:
https://portal.smartertools.com/community/a95842/arc-email-authentication.aspx

+1 (100?) to Sabatino!

I use additional services such als smtp2go and smtp.com for upstream smtp-gateways as specific gateway for selected domains. I think you can use them also with round robin.

yes but it's crazy.

I want to be able to use smtp2go and smtp.com or other rules-based smtp services.

For example use smtp2go for all messages destined for outlook.tld for example. This would allow me to quickly resolve any crazy MS blocks without having to redirect all the mailserver traffic and pay a lot to smtp2go.

I'll say again that there are a thousand scenarios in which routing rules are useful, the one described is just one of many

I think it's a really cool idea to be able to define destination gateways according to specific recipient domains. But then you have to be able to map a scenario that is the standard for all those recipients that have not been explicitly defined with a destination server, have I understood that correctly?

Just think by priority

Currently SM has a routing that we can call static.

Now it would be enough to allow you to set routing rules that have priority over the default ones.

So if there is no rule that changes the routing, the default one is used

edit

in short, no changes to the current structure of SM, just an addition of rules that act primarily on delivery

Hi Sabatino,

Great suggestion for SM. Now a days, we use postfix for relay outbound with specified rules for yahoo.com. Works very well.

Honestly, I find it very difficult to understand SM's reasons for not introducing a feature of this type which is present in many mailservers and which would make SM less dependent on dedicated outbound gateways (postfix for example)