On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 03:24:51PM +0800, 彭國達 wrote: > Randall: > > Thank you so much for your idea. Actually, I did it in a different way > and got what I want. You told me to comment out line 57 delete_msg. I tried > but didn't work (maybe I didn't understand what you mean). I change > delete_msg call to undelete_msg call. When delete_msg is called, qpopper > actually mark messages as undelete. It work with outlook express so far. > Others should be teseted later. > Any idea for this kind of trick?
Sounds like a pretty good way to do it. > In response to your curiosity: > The story wourld sound like: > > User pcs are always infected by virus and crashed by some other reason. > Users don't have any sense to backup their important files from mail to file > server IT people feel it too much trouble to educate users. Whenever their > pc crashed, important messages or even files are lost. IT people don't want > to use tar or tape backup and restore utility to backup user maildrop. My > idea is that, we can use a secondary mail server as mail backup server. By > using aliases name, user mail can be forwarded to secondary mail server. > Secondary server will have a big enough disk array to store mail for about > one year. Of course, secondary are redundant for first mail server. > Whenever pc crashed, user can retrieve all their mail from the secondary > (mail for this year). After they retrieve backup mail from secondary, mail > should be kept, not deleted. They can retrieve mail again from secondary > server, if their pc crashed and mail lost again. Also, IT people feel it > extremely difficult to ask user to configure their mail client software to > keep mail archive in mail server. That's why I asked for this solution. > I know there must some other solutions, but this one is fully automatic > and the best (so far) in my idea. If you have any better idea, please let > me know. I would appreciate it very much. That's a very creative solution! It'll probably take some refining, but if you're willing to invest the money in the storage, it could certainly help with the problem you describe. If IT doesn't want to educate users, that's the biggest problem that you need to work around. In that case, you might also think about investing some effort in preventing the virus infections, e.g. by developing procmail filters to run on the server where mail is delivered, which will very selectively delete the most common types of email viruses on your system before they reach your users. Viruses such as Sircam, Nimda, Magistr, etc. are all quite possible to detect and drop when incoming. > Still there are a lot to consider. Like, will the big maildrop infected > system performance, can qpopper handle single maildrop larger 200MB or even > 400MB. My experience is that it may cause problems on the client side at connection time, due to the delays when qpopper needs to actually scan the whole spool and build the list of UIDLs, which it does right after authenticating the password. Large mail downloads can be a problem over modem connections but should not be over LAN. -- Clifton -- Clifton Royston -- LavaNet Systems Architect -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWJD? "JWRTFM!" - Scott Dorsey (kludge) "JWG" - Eddie Aikau
