Same here with Exim delivering to Dovecot via LMTP.
On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 7:23 PM Christian Kivalo ml+dovecot@valo.at wrote:
On 2024-01-19 16:12, Peter wrote:
On 20/01/24 12:28, Joe Acquisto wrote:
I noticed that many places in the documentation and in examples gleaned from the wilderness, refer to the LDA protocol when discussing sieve.
The documentation also mentions that lmtp is preferred over lda, and seems to say in places that sieve will operate without issue in either case.
Does it matter to sieve implementation if one uses only lmtp?
LDA is older, think of LMTP as a more modern replacement. LDA has to launch a separate process and process one message at a time. LMTP
On January 21, 2024 12:51:00 AM GMT+01:00, Michael Peddemors < michael@linuxmagic.com> wrote: maintains a running service and can stream multiple messages in a single connection, therefore LMTP is a lot more efficient.
You will see a lot of bad advice on the internet, or old outdated
advice. Tutorials that use LDA is an example of old, outdated advice.
Sieve itself doesn't care which one you use, but there are other
reasons to prefer LMTP.
Just wish LMTP would not end up with duplicate Return-Path headers.. Duplicate return path headers? I don't see them on my system. All mail is sent from postfix to dovecot with lmtp
-- Christian Kivalo
dovecot mailing list -- dovecot@dovecot.org To unsubscribe send an email to dovecot-leave@dovecot.org
-- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 214-642-9640 (c) E-Mail: larryrtx@gmail.com US Mail: 5708 Sabbia Dr, Round Rock, TX 78665-2106
Same here with Exim delivering to Dovecot via LMTP.
On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 7:23 PM Christian Kivalo ml+dovecot@valo.at wrote:
On January 21, 2024 12:51:00 AM GMT+01:00, Michael Peddemors
<michael@linuxmagic.com> wrote:
>On 2024-01-19 16:12, Peter wrote:
>> On 20/01/24 12:28, Joe Acquisto wrote:
>>> I noticed that many places in the documentation and in examples
gleaned from the wilderness, refer to the LDA protocol when
discussing sieve.
>>>
>>> The documentation also mentions that lmtp is preferred over lda,
and seems to say in places that sieve will operate without issue in
either case.
>>>
>>> Does it matter to sieve implementation if one uses only lmtp?
>>
>> LDA is older, think of LMTP as a more modern replacement. LDA has
to launch a separate process and process one message at a time. LMTP
maintains a running service and can stream multiple messages in a
single connection, therefore LMTP is a lot more efficient.
>>
>> You will see a lot of bad advice on the internet, or old outdated
advice. Tutorials that use LDA is an example of old, outdated
advice.
>>
>> Sieve itself doesn't care which one you use, but there are other
reasons to prefer LMTP.
>
>Just wish LMTP would not end up with duplicate Return-Path headers..
Duplicate return path headers? I don't see them on my system. All
mail is sent from postfix to dovecot with lmtp
--
Christian Kivalo
_______________________________________________
dovecot mailing list -- dovecot@dovecot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to dovecot-leave@dovecot.org-- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 214-642-9640 (c) E-Mail: larryrtx@gmail.com US Mail: 5708 Sabbia Dr, Round Rock, TX 78665-2106