But I'm curious if it will support approximately 500(+) connections at a
time. If your Environment is anything like the ones at any of the colleges
I am familiar with there are numerous massive log-ins based on the daily
class cycle. Good luck
Kevin Childers
Mail Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Carolina's Fastest Internet Service Provider
www.NetQuick.net
(910) 486-7845 Ext. 23
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gordon Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 1:43 PM
Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] Poll: Imail6 on W2K
>
> Len,
>
> Right - I'm running SMTP, WebMessaging, & Logger services. The
> other IMail services are not loaded (since I want to focus my
> horsepower on SSL-based web messaging). By forcing SSL, I preclude
> unsecured web messaging connections -- yielding EXACTLY what I was
> looking for (Thanks, Ipswitch!). 100% encrypted email over the
> Internet (critical, given legal & ethical mandates to protect
> patient confidentiality).
>
> Haven't researched MS KB. I have the luxury of watching the impact
> on load as users are added. If the Dell Optiplex PIII 550MHz 384MB
> box with U2W 36GB SCSI drives gets bogged down, I'll migrate it to a
> multiprocessor box or add peer servers.
>
> With NT4, throwing multiple processors at a job did little to
> improve things (you're better off throwing a faster single processor
> at it). But MS has gotten a lot of things (more) right about
> Win2000, including MUCH better utilization of multiple processors.
>
> The load is not easy to anticipate, because I won't be dealing with
> 5,000 typical email users. These will be clinicians & patients
> communicating with each other regarding delivery of health services
> and the transmission of medical records. All of them have another
> email account (unsecure) which is their primary account for routine
> email. So I'm only needing to handle a subset of the email needs
> for these folks. That's why I'm playing this one by ear... I think
> simultaneous hits won't approach 10%.
>
> I'll find out over the next few months whether I'm right <grin>.
>
> Gordon
>
> -----
> Len Conrad wrote:
> >
> > >I'm running IMail 6.02 on Win2000 Server. I can't contribute much
> > >to your query, because it's only been in production mode for two
> > >weeks as a secure departmental mail server (100 users thus far,
> > >adding 4,000 over the next few months, then about 5,000 added per
> > >year). Since I want SSL, I'm not running POP3 or IMAP4, and I'm
> > >"forcing" SSL connections.
> >
> > how do you do that, please? by only allowing Web Msging?
> >
> > >But no problems thus far. I'm going to be interested to see what
> > >kind of load is created by 5,000 SSL web messaging users (given that
> > >I'm permitting no other access).
> >
> > How many simultaneous SSL sessions can MS tcp/ip support? Let's say 10%
of
> > your users connect simultaneously, that 500 encrypted sessions. Sounds
> > like lot. Have you researched the MS kb and website for how/if to that
many?
> >
> > Len
> Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> to be removed from this list.
>
Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
to be removed from this list.
