7
Need a feature that force IP rotation at RANDOM and/or EVER "X" TIMES
Idea shared by Gabriele Maoret - SERSIS - 7/16/2024 at 12:07 PM
Planned
 I think there is a need for a new feature that can rotate IPs with these parameters (without worrying about successes and failures):
 - NEVER
 - RANDOMLY
 - EVERY "X" TIMES (where "X" is a number corresponding to the number of times this IP is used before moving on to the next IP in the list)
Gabriele Maoret - Head of SysAdmins and CISO at SERSIS
Currently manages 6 SmarterMail installations (1 in the cloud for SERSIS which provides services to a few hundred third-party email domains + 5 on-premise for customers who prefer to have their mail server in-house)

15 Replies

Reply to Thread
0
Tony Scholz Replied
Employee Post
I have submitted this as a Feature Request.
Tony Scholz System/Network Administrator SmarterTools Inc. www.smartertools.com
0
THX...

Another useful option to add for this feature can be this: ROTATE IP EVERY X MINUTES
Gabriele Maoret - Head of SysAdmins and CISO at SERSIS Currently manages 6 SmarterMail installations (1 in the cloud for SERSIS which provides services to a few hundred third-party email domains + 5 on-premise for customers who prefer to have their mail server in-house)
0
Tony Scholz Replied
Employee Post
Added
Tony Scholz System/Network Administrator SmarterTools Inc. www.smartertools.com
2
I swear I’ve requested this as well like 5+ years ago too. 
0
Yes, I know.

Let's hope this will be the time...
Gabriele Maoret - Head of SysAdmins and CISO at SERSIS Currently manages 6 SmarterMail installations (1 in the cloud for SERSIS which provides services to a few hundred third-party email domains + 5 on-premise for customers who prefer to have their mail server in-house)
4
Zach Sylvester Replied
Employee Post
Hey everyone,

We're thrilled to announce that we're developing split-domain routing and new gateway features to support a single domain with unlimited users on unlimited servers for those who may offer SmarterMail as a free service. This means individual users, who are not related, can share the same domain, much like gmail.com. However, for free users, sharing features like email folder sharing, calendar sharing, and the Global Address List (GAL) will be disabled. By "FREE," we just mean it will resemble and act like a free email service. We are not saying you cannot charge for it.

We are also implementing a corporate version of a single domain with 150,000 users (hopefully more), over a limited number of servers, with full functionality. Advanced delivery features such as intelligent IP rotation will be included. Our system will continuously check IPs against blacklists and SPF records to ensure the best delivery performance. The split-domain functionality will involve a central gateway server that manages a user list and routes messages to the appropriate servers seamlessly.

This will make SmarterMail even more capable in a variety of different use case scenarios. Stay tuned for more updates!
Zach Sylvester Software Developer SmarterTools Inc. www.smartertools.com
0
Wow!

Hope to see this soon!
Gabriele Maoret - Head of SysAdmins and CISO at SERSIS Currently manages 6 SmarterMail installations (1 in the cloud for SERSIS which provides services to a few hundred third-party email domains + 5 on-premise for customers who prefer to have their mail server in-house)
0
Nice!! This sounds promising :)
2
Any news on this?
0
We are waiting for it too...
Gabriele Maoret - Head of SysAdmins and CISO at SERSIS Currently manages 6 SmarterMail installations (1 in the cloud for SERSIS which provides services to a few hundred third-party email domains + 5 on-premise for customers who prefer to have their mail server in-house)
0
News?
Gabriele Maoret - Head of SysAdmins and CISO at SERSIS Currently manages 6 SmarterMail installations (1 in the cloud for SERSIS which provides services to a few hundred third-party email domains + 5 on-premise for customers who prefer to have their mail server in-house)
1
We are waiting for it too...

0
For my use case, I would be happy with rotating gateway servers plus some intelligence at the primary server.

I like the idea of monitoring against blacklists, but it's actually more than that - the feature should ideally monitor for delivery delay responses so it can forward on to an alternate gateway.

My system primarily sends transactional emails, not marketing spam, but customers will type their email addresses incorrectly and when messages are delivered to the wrong people, users of those services (yahoo, gmail, etc) are trigger-happy and will mark the message as junk. The side effect for me is that the entire IP gets blocked or throttled, which leads me to a days-long effort to get the email admins at whatever service to respond to me (Yahoo just took one week to unblock one of my gateways) and fix their problem (while my clients are yelling at me).

Today, SmarterMail's outbound gateway mode transmits the message to an outbound gateway - and leaves it there. If it encounters a problem there, it's going to be stuck there forever (at least until the retries expire and the message bounces).

Instead, SmarterMail's primary server could send the message to the gateway, which could try to send it, but if it encounters a delay or other such block, it could pass it back to the primary server, which could then move on to an alternate gateway.

Then, if an IP gets blocked, I could temporarily remove it from the pool of gateways.

This would be a dramatic improvement over the current situation.
1
While we are at it, I would also like to improve the logging for the outbound gateway selection process. As far as I can tell, there is no log entry when an outbound gateway is selected (or not selected) in the delivery process. This has made outbound email troubleshooting rather difficult.

All I see in the delivery log is "Initiating connection to 10.0.0.9" (the ip of one of my outbound gateways).

I would like to have a log entry for how and why a gateway was selected or skipped. Was it part of a round robin? Was it skipped because it was deactivated or because of a connection error? Was the primary server used because selections were unavailable? Etc.

Reply to Thread

Enter the verification text