SMTP email [always on, you are the hoster] can be set up without a static IP address with the use of Dynamic IP sites such as www.dns2go.com or www.tzo.com . Both of these services allow a firm with a dynamic IP address to host email. Tzo.com will also provide a service for fallover mail server should your SBS box need a backup [which is rare].
Open up port 25
If Static IP, have your ISP point the MX record to the static IP address of your SBS box. If there is a router between your SBS box and the static IP, ensure that the router is forwarding port 25 traffic from that outside IP address to the IP address of the SBS box connected to that router.
I just don't understand what the problem is. WHY do people wish to reduce the pop connector collection time? Well, actually, NO, that's not the question. The question is more like 'WHY do people put so much effort into reducing the pop connector retrieval interval?'. With maybe a corollary question of 'WHY is it so damned important?'. I was dealing with a company for tech support today, the guy emailed me some notes. As we receive via SMTP no POP connector delay was involved. While I was on the phone I heard him reading the email, he suggested he was forwarding it to me and I could hear him typing as he asked me to pause while I was giving him my email address, he then suggested 'you should get it soon' so I'm supposing he had actually hit the 'send' button at this time. I also called someone else for support yesterday and went through a similar scenario. Both emails were simple text messages. One arrived inside the 15 minutes, the other took 3 hours. One was from Trend Micro, the other was from Microsoft. This is the nature of internet email. An old quote about internet email suggests '90% gets delivered inside a few minutes, 5% takes a couple of days, 5% goes into the big pop box in the sky and no-one knows why.' I also receive via SMTP at home. If the girl next door emailed me I would receive it with minimal delay. If she expected me to get off my ass and knock on her door within 15 minutes she better be offering something better than dinner to fix her computer. I just don't understand what the frenzy is. On the other hand, there are very good reasons why after attempting POP collection once a short delay should occur before another pop collection is attempted. Many mail systems (and I'm probably talking *nix here, particularly *nix mail server farms) 'lock' the mailbox during delivery, if you attempt to access the mailbox before the lock is released it will error. The previous POP conversation can be complete but because the server is handling thousands of requests and also doing it's own housekeeping the mailbox may still be locked. I'm not sure but I think the lock exists to eradicate the chance of duplicate delivery. ie. (if the mailbox lock was not implemented) popconversation1 'HI, any new mail?' popconversation1 'Yep, sure is, 1*10MB message' popconversation1 'give it to me baby' Transfer starts popconversation2 'HI, any new mail?' popconversation2 'Yep, sure is, 1*10MB message' popconversation2 'give it to me baby' Transfer starts some time later more pop conversations get initiated and we've got more transfers of the same message which eventually may end. The client then has multiple copies of the same message which transferred slowly because they all happened at the same time,,, and gets rather confused what to do with them. Just my take on the issue. I must be 'in a mood'. IF your users DEMAND immediate reception of mail tell them the best you can do is a permanent IP and SMTP delivery, which may result in delays of several minutes to several days, but won't include an additional 14 minutes and 59 seconds.
This site Copyrighted by Susan Bradley, CPA/CITP, MCP, please distribute it as you see fit,
I make no warranties regarding the information contained in the links listed above. Surf at your own risk.