IPv6-capable mail server for Windows

[miloszgancarz]

I'm a Windows admin, so I decided to run through your tests in Windows. 
I've spent a couple hours searching for a mail server (or even just an SMTP server) for Windows that will acknowledge that I have IPv6 installed and bind to the IPv6 address.  I've come up with nothing, except for some murky info on Exchange 2010.  I would like to NOT install Exchange 2010. 

Has ANYONE successfully completed the email test by setting up an IPv6 mail service in Windows?  If yes, what was the software used?

thanks
Milo

[jimb]

May want to check here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_mail_servers

There's a few which run on windows and are free.  I presume at least a few do IPv6.

[miloszgancarz]

Thanks, I saw that list yesterday.  It doesn't help by itself because neither product pages nor the list indicate IPv6 support.  I'm not desperate enough to start signing up for trials and downloading dozens of software packages just to check if they care to do IPv6.  One would think that if they supported IPv6 they would trumpet about it on their product page. 

Evidence tells me that unless proven otherwise, there is no Windows mail software that supports IPv6 except for Exchange. 

I'm not done looking yet but will post the results. 

(and wow - is it possible that all the people who got certified here were not using Windows?)

[miloszgancarz]

Looks like I'll get lucky today.  Apache James for Windows inconspicously bound itself to IPv6 stack on the box and I'll go through with configuring it..

[miloszgancarz]

I've successfully setup (and secured somewhat) my IPv6 mail server using Apache James. 

jimb, thanks for believing in the list - your note made me come back to the list. 

[jimb]

Heh I suspected Apache James would do IPv6, because I know Apache web server does IPv6, and I presumed that James ran under Apache or something similar.  I think the whole thing is written as a Java servelet or something.  Or perhaps just standlone Java code (but then why would it be called Apache James?).  Either way, I knew java did V6 as well, so likely the mail server would too unless it was "hard coded" to use v4.

[kriteknetworks]

(and wow - is it possible that all the people who got certified here were not using Windows?)

Of course. Microsoft is new to the IPv6 game, the Unices and linux have been doing it for years.
This is why the BIG majority of IPv6 based services are not Microsoft based. Windows may currently rule the desktop/user space, but not for Internet services :)

[dataless]

Microsoft and most companies like them have specific worries about security, which is why they are slow to add things like IPv6 until all of the basic security risks have been analyzed to death and back, then they will add their own security risks to the system.  :)

This can be somewhat of a blessing but also somewhat of a pain in the neck.  I for example am a big fan of CentOS, a Redhat based distro of Linux that is geared towards enterprise servers.  Because of this some of their software versions are a year behind current release, due to them wanting to ensure security and compatibility.

Since my router is a custom version of Linux (ServGate SG570) and isn't friendly to modifications, and because Windows is so new to IPv6 I setup a VMware server and an installation of CentOS 5.3 on my Windows Server and I use that to handle IPv6 routing for my home network.  Sounds complicated but I'd rather spend a 512mb of ram on a Linux VM than to try and configure Windows to handle IPv6 for a network.. lol

I'm glad to know there is an IPv6 MTA option for Windows though, I'll keep Apache James in mind if I need to setup a mail server on Windows.

[jimb]

Hrm.  From what I have seen, Windows has pretty good IPv6 support as a client at least.  I haven't tried to use it as a router/firewall or anything like that though.  I probably wouldn't try that anyway even for IPv4.  :P  I know a bunch of people are using Window for 6in4.  :shrug:

Windows also has Teredo built in, which makes it pretty easy for just about anyone to get IPv6.  Sure, it's inefficient, but generally all you need to do is turn it on and voila, you have v6.

[yorick]

I'm using xmail. It was fairly easy to set up, and does the job. It does want a whole bunch of command-line stuff to run as ipv6, and I could not get it to start as a service - which is fine, as I have no intent of actually running it for anything but the cert.

Here's the command line I use, in case it's helpful:

xmail --debug -Md -M7 -S6 -P- -B- -X- -Y- -F- -W-

And don't forget to set MAIL_ROOT.  ::)

[dataless]

Hrm.  From what I have seen, Windows has pretty good IPv6 support as a client at least.  I haven't tried to use it as a router/firewall or anything like that though.  I probably wouldn't try that anyway even for IPv4.  :P  I know a bunch of people are using Window for 6in4.  :shrug:

Windows also has Teredo built in, which makes it pretty easy for just about anyone to get IPv6.  Sure, it's inefficient, but generally all you need to do is turn it on and voila, you have v6.

Windows still lacks in several major areas.

Like the fact in XP and 2003 even you can't modify the IPv6 settings through the GUI, it's all command line crap.  On top of that many versions of Windows don't allow pure IPv6 as far as I remember, you could for example setup a test machine on an IPv6 network and disable the IPv4 stack in XP and you wouldn't be able to do much of anything. It still relies on IPv4 for DNS. At least that was my results with XP SP3 and 2003 both.

Remote Desktop and similar things, like many functions of IIS are not IPv6 aware as well.  Microsoft has a LONG way to go for IPv6 to be fully functional IMO.  Windows 7 isn't bad so far, and from what I understand 2008 works fairly well with it.  If you consider the age of IPv6 and how long it's been in development I would say MS really waited as long as they could to start supporting it.

Again, I understand many of the reasons WHY they waited, I'm just saying they are very far behind NIX systems in their support.  I'm a Windows desktop person, not some MS hater so I'm not trying to just rant about them or anything.  Only pointing out I wish they would have put more work into IPv6 earlier.  I don't believe until Windows 7 and 2008 Server are standard will Windows really be viable for IPv6 in most environments.

[jimb]

Yeh that's why I said as a client.  Server stuff is a bit lacking now on XP.  But almost all client apps I use support IPv6.  For instance, even though I can't connect to an XP box with RDP using IPv6, I can connect from an XP box to a Win7 box using IPv6.

But then, for server side, I tend to use Linux/Unix, using Windows as a desktop platform.  :)

It shouldn't be difficult for MS to make these things work.  I watched some video that says Winsock and the other APIs will support IPv6 as long as the application is not written to hard code it to use IPv4.  And of course the applications have to refrain from dialogs and config file entries which call specifically for dotted quad IPv4 style address notation.  So most apps only need slight modification to work with IPv6, if any.  But I wouldn't hold my breath for MS to improve all this under XP since they want everyone to move to Win7 and Server 2008 now.  :P

[dataless]

Yeah, as a client it's worked well for me.  Most of my client access has been on 7, which as a desktop OS I must say I really like.

I don't see MS putting any real work into IPv6 on anything less than 7/2008 either.  Where's the profit in updating an old system when you can sell a new version.. :)

I'm usually a Linux person for servers as well, but some of my clients have to use Windows for one reason or another.  Several of them use Quickbooks, which barely works on it's native OS of Windows, there's no chance I'd ever attempt to make that piece of crap work under Wine.. lol..

[bradharris]

I'm using xmail. It was fairly easy to set up, and does the job. It does want a whole bunch of command-line stuff to run as ipv6, and I could not get it to start as a service - which is fine, as I have no intent of actually running it for anything but the cert.

Here's the command line I use, in case it's helpful:

xmail --debug -Md -M7 -S6 -P- -B- -X- -Y- -F- -W-

And don't forget to set MAIL_ROOT.  ::)

Thanks a million!

[YASSKYLIGHT]

I used MailEnable. Standard Edition is free (for comercial too). Easy setup, small resources. IIS only for WebMail, and not obligated.
For labs is very good, you could get mail and web site in one flacon.
For Windows only.