Re: Help me avoid Exchange
On Dec 30, 2005, at 18:13, Ben Scott wrote: You could always call the BSA anti-piracy hotline at 1-888-NO-PIRACY and report them. Ha ha. Only serious. You assume this isn't by design and Microsoft would want to prosecute. I'm not yet convinced the time has come to ruin our pirating friends (that is likely bankrupt them by leveraging the government monopoly on the use of force) to further the cause of Free Software. But I'm interested to hear people who want to argue this point. -Bill - Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 603.252.2606 http://www.bfccomputing.com/Page: 603.442.1833 Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/ VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
On 1/1/06, Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 30, 2005, at 18:13, Ben Scott wrote: You could always call the BSA anti-piracy hotline at 1-888-NO-PIRACY and report them. Ha ha. Only serious. You assume this isn't by design and Microsoft would want to prosecute. No, that's pretty much where I was going with that. It's be interesting to study the (presumed lack of) response in such cases. I'm not yet convinced the time has come to ruin our pirating friends ... to further the cause of Free Software. Yah, yah, me neither. It's just always irked me that one answer many people have for the problems of proprietary software is XYZ is free, too -- just download it. *I* end up paying, in money, sweat, and tears. They get a free ride. trails off in a low grumble -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
On 12/29/05, Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12/29/05, Thomas Charron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: g) If the load issue is enough to justify a separate Exchange server, then add another Windows Server licensing cost. Unless, of course, someone has an MSDN subscription.. I'm not sure, but I think the MSDN license does not permitproduction use of server products. Production use of supporting the development department falls under the licence. At least it did, at some point in the life of that ever changing MSDN licence. Aka, production email of the development departments email is still development work. h) Depending on the version of Exchange, the default for converting MAPI messages to MIME format is HTML. While this can be changed on a user-by-user basis, if your clients don't do HTML, then they won't be able to read MAPI messages. *blink*I missed some contextual data here.If you're using IMAP and SMTP, what's MAPI have to do with anything? The term MAPI is heavily overloaded.There are two client APIscalled MAPI, there's the so-called MAPI wire protocol used to communicate between Exchange and Outlook, and there's the messageformat called MAPI.I believe the OP is talking about the last one. *nod* Light shines with dim bulb on my head suddenly. You can configure exchange to do pretty much whatever you want with em anyway.. If you can only figure out *how*... ;-) Hehe. Hence, why plopping a Linux guy in front of an exchange server isn't always the best solution.. ;-) If they already paid 100k for a god damned bus, 'becouse that bus cost too much' isn't going to fly..;-) Buses don't normally fly anyway.;-) Hey, these are engineers. Anything can happen.. ;-) Bus, 2.0... Look, WINGS!' Thomas
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
On Dec 29, 2005, at 23:36, Ben Scott wrote: Unless, of course, someone has an MSDN subscription.. I'm not sure, but I think the MSDN license does not permit production use of server products. Ah, yes, the dirty little secret of Microsoft licensing. The other one being the Action Pack - for $350/yr you can get all of Microsoft's non-developer tools on a subscription basis. For evaluation purposes, and you have to be a Microsoft Partner (i.e. you filled out a web form). I know several consultants who run their businesses on the Action Pack because they couldn't afford to actually buy the required licenses. They then recommend these products to their clients. I tell them, don't pirate* - use free software. This is actually a very successful tactic with redneck crowd, but not so much with Microsoft consultants. Ah, well, I tried to set them straight. -Bill * just showing the term is meaningless but still dramatic - Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 603.252.2606 http://www.bfccomputing.com/Page: 603.442.1833 Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/ VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
On Dec 30, 2005, at 14:09, mike ledoux wrote: their suggested solution was 'build another server with enough disk space to restore the entire mail store, install and configure exactly the same version of scalix with all patches, etc., then wrestle with openmail to export that user's mail and import it back into the production server'. Wow, they really are taking on Exchange feature-for-feature! :) -Bill - Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 603.252.2606 http://www.bfccomputing.com/Page: 603.442.1833 Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/ VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
On 12/30/05, Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know several consultants who run their businesses on the Action Pack because they couldn't afford to actually buy the required licenses. They then recommend these products to their clients. I tell them, don't pirate* - use free software. This is actually a very successful tactic with redneck crowd, but not so much with Microsoft consultants. Ah, well, I tried to set them straight. You could always call the BSA anti-piracy hotline at 1-888-NO-PIRACY and report them. Ha ha. Only serious. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
Hi, I've been following with interest the discussion re: a replacement for MS Exchange. I have been looking for a viable alternative for having an Exchange server, for some time. I am looking into Scalix (http://scalix.com/) and wondered if anyone has yet compiled a list of all the possible FOSS alternatives avilable out there? Mike __ Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year. http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/ ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
On Dec 29, 2005, at 12:36, mike shlitz wrote: I am looking into Scalix (http://scalix.com/) and wondered if anyone has yet compiled a list of all the possible FOSS alternatives avilable out there? I'm not sure about the list, but if you're compiling one, this looks pretty slick too: http://www.zimbra.com/flash_demo/flash_demo.html I've also heard good and medium things about Communigate. -Bill - Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 603.252.2606 http://www.bfccomputing.com/Page: 603.442.1833 Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/ VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
Below are devils advocate responses. Becouse while I agree on many of them, there comes a point when 'D00d, Exhang3 1z sux0rs!' may need a little check.. ;-) On 12/23/05, Dan Jenkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Issues with Exchange I can think of, off the top of my head:a) The aforementioned backups - media usage, time, etc.If Engineering gets lots of large documents, which most business folk typically don'tget, then the backup window shrinks and media costs manage costs forsaid backups could skyrocket. (At one client of mine, email disk space used for a dozen business users was a 500 MB a year. The three engineeraccounts added 2 GB a week.) If they're not backing up the engineering email server, then someone isn't taking the time to think about the email servers, which is what IT is for. It's real easy to not be diligent when it's not your job, and when that evil day comes, and you have to explain that those three engineers just lost 3 days worth of work becouse a server disk crashed.. You'll cry. I've been there, trust me.. ;-) If the backups are being done, then the backup is really not that much harder. You're already backing up 'X' amount of data. b) The additional licensing costs for Exchange for the additionalengineering seats Possibly. It depends on the license, and how many are available. The real base buy it at BestBuy Exchange 2003 comes with only 5 CAL licences. In this case, you'd definatly have purchased some CAL upgrades. If not, it depends on how much of a 100k a year engineers time is being paid to do a job someone else is already paid to do. c) Additional load on the Exchange server. Again, if engineering handlesskads of large attachments, that could kill the Exchange server, if it's not capable enough. So factor in Exchange server upgrades, if needed. ... Again, one would assume that this scanning is already taking place. I mean, from a price perspective, you could just backup the existing user data, format the machine, and carry into the IT room and install exchange and have that very machine serving as a backup server, running exchange. d) If Exchange is running antivirus too, there could be additionallicensing costs. The same load issues as in (c) (Virus scanning a 150 MB email attachment can be a bit burdensome. ;-) Yes, it can be. See above. It's should already be being done. e) Same load licensing issues for antispam measures running onExchange. Ditto for content filtering, compliance enforcement and other email services. *cough* And we all know that all of these aren't needed when using an IMAP server and just downloading them directly from the mail server onto... Wait a sec, now I'm talking out of my ass.. ;-) See above. Hell, I'd dare say many exchange spam scanners are faster them spamassasin can be if you've got some madass rules like Brian Chabot used to have on his boxes. f) If the Exchange server is also providing other services, the extraload might impact those services. If they are business critical services...well... Engineers aren't critital? ;-) g) If the load issue is enough to justify a separate Exchange server,then add another Windows Server licensing cost. Unless, of course, someone has an MSDN subscription.. h) Depending on the version of Exchange, the default for converting MAPImessages to MIME format is HTML. While this can be changed on a user-by-user basis, if your clients don't do HTML, then they won't beable to read MAPI messages. *blink* I missed some contextual data here. If you're using IMAP and SMTP, what's MAPI have to do with anything? You can configure exchange to do pretty much whatever you want with em anyway.. i) I've heard of, though not encountered, about some IMAP clientincompatibilities with Exchange. That, my friend, is what we call FUD when Microsoft says it. j) Only MAPI email clients are Outlook and OWC, as far as I know. So,Outlook or webmail via Internet Explorer. (I have had incompatibilities with OWC and non-IE browsers.) This isn't an issue for IMAP-only usage,of course, but no calendaring/workflow/etc. in that case. True, but they don't have calendaring anyway right now. The only way to get that feature is WITH something like exchange. If you don't like that, then you can use Ximian to interface with OWC. iCal sucks balls, it's just a way to store cals in a file, with no real way to interface or plan with them. k) Directory (as in LDAP vs. Active Directory) additional maintenance.This raises any authentication issues as well. This may be moot in your case. *blinkblink* You do know that AD is basically LDAP.. Right? Hope this helps. I don't think it would, since all of these are moot points for the most part, for someone that doesn't care. And the higher up the manager tends to be.. The less he will really care. It doesn't really affect him. Tell him how it will save HIM money, and help HIM do his job better, and now you're cooking with gas. But say 'Well, exchange sux0rs, and IT is idiots',
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
On 12/22/05, Paul Lussier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I need to come up with (currently) valid reasons why it's a bad ideato move engineering over to an Exchange-based IMAP server from a linux/cyrus-based IMAP server.So, I'm asking for help from those ofyou who have current, relevant experience with running small companies(30-50 people) on Exchange.Btw, Engineering currenrtly doesn't have calendaring, and most of us would use Exchange purely as an IMAPserver, not using the added benefits Exchange burdens you with.Any and all help *gratefully* accepted! I lost track of where youwork now. What does the company do? Can a buisness case be made that you can make more money having your email in your control? Find the money conversation, and typically, anyone will listen. TCharron
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
On 12/29/05, Thomas Charron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
g) If the load issue is enough to justify a separate Exchange server,
then add another Windows Server licensing cost.
Unless, of course, someone has an MSDN subscription..
I'm not sure, but I think the MSDN license does not permit
production use of server products.
h) Depending on the version of Exchange, the default for converting MAPI
messages to MIME format is HTML. While this can be changed on a
user-by-user basis, if your clients don't do HTML, then they won't be
able to read MAPI messages.
*blink* I missed some contextual data here. If you're using IMAP
and SMTP, what's MAPI have to do with anything?
The term MAPI is heavily overloaded. There are two client APIs
called MAPI, there's the so-called MAPI wire protocol used to
communicate between Exchange and Outlook, and there's the message
format called MAPI. I believe the OP is talking about the last one.
Say you've got a big group of Outlook users with a huge store of
messages. Many, if not most, of those messages will be in MAPI
format. (In Exchange 5.5, they all were.) If an IMAP or POP client
connects to Exchange, Exchange converts the MAPI messages into MIME
format on-the-fly. With Exchange 2000/2003, the MIME version also
gets stored into the streaming (STM) side of the Information Store
(MAPI items live in the EDB side of the IS).
Which actually raises a point I forgot: if you have a large
mixed-client base sharing many messages, your disk space usage for
Exchange can increase dramatically, as Exchange ends up keeping two
copies of every message (one MAPI, one MIME). I doubt Paul's company
is going to see an en masse migration to IMAP, though, so this is more
of a theoretical point.
You can configure exchange
to do pretty much whatever you want with em anyway..
If you can only figure out *how*... ;-)
If they already paid 100k for a god damned bus, 'becouse that bus cost too
much' isn't going to fly.. ;-)
Buses don't normally fly anyway. ;-)
-- Ben
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 10:26:02 -0500, Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The point that Dan Jenkins raises WRT storage demands is a good one. Exchange storage tends to cost more then Unix mail storage. This is especially true if you're on Exchange Standard, which has a 16 GB limit (or 75 GB for Exch 2003 Std). If you hit that, you have to drop significant cash on a license upgrade. That being said, one thing Exchange does bring to the table is SIS (Single Instance Storage). If one luser mails a 50 MB PowerPoint file to everybody in the company, Exchange only stores one copy of the file. Depending on your usage patterns, that may make a big difference, or none at all. Cyrus IMAP has supported SIS since 1999, with the release of version 1.6.20. One copy of the message is saved per disk partition, and hard links are created to all other mailboxes. Only caveat is that SIS only works for messages delivered via LMTP, but nowadays that is hardly an issue. Mark ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
On Thursday 22 December 2005 03:40 pm, Paul Lussier wrote: Hi folks, Up until now I've been fairly lucky in maintaining our IMAP server on Cyrus. However, we've identified a project which we'd like to move forward to better construct our mail architecture. When we proposed this project to our VP of Engineering, he rightfully asked the question of, Why should we bother continuing to maintain anything related to mail when we have an IT group to do just that? Is that the only reason to go forward with this? If you have something that works, I find it hard to believe that he just decided one day you should combine with them. There must be some reason he wants to push you in that direction. As for interoperability with Exchange from the client side, I've never had problems with Kontact from KDE. It does the calendaring, address booking, and email without any difficulty. That said, it's no better or worse than the free alternatives that will likely give you far more flexibility. That said, if you're looking just to use IMAP, Exchange can do that and my guess is your boss is concerned you're spending too much time managing the current solution rather than contributing to the purpose of your department (which I'm assuming is not supposed to overlap with the IT group). If you want to keep things the way they are, convince him there's no overhead to maintaining things as they are. Honestly, that hasn't been my experience (although limited) with Cyrus - I find it to be a pain in the ass. I guess I don't really have an opinion one way or the other on this issue aside from a general disgust for Exchange, but hopefully this collection of unrelated points and digressions may help you out. -N ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
Also make sure that the Exchange server isn't retardedly configured to e.g. block all incoming .zip / .exe attachments. While this is argued to be necessary for security by some IT departments, it's complete hell for an engineer trying to use the system... heck, .zip and .exe attachments are most of the reason I use email at all! (renaming doesn't even work with some of the brain-damaged configs I've faced, it scans the attachment for the magic numbers of compressed files etc.) --Drew Van Zandt
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
From my understanding, you're in the engineering group at this company and you keep your own separate mail server? If Exchange is setup, would you have to maintain it at all? I say if it's not your problem, let them do what they want. I've been at a number of companies that used Exchange. As long as I got my email, and it wasn't up to me to fix the server every time it broke, I could care less what it ran. BTW, management -LOVES- the shared calendars. I was always forced to use them. Paul Lussier wrote: Hi folks, Up until now I've been fairly lucky in maintaining our IMAP server on Cyrus. However, we've identified a project which we'd like to move forward to better construct our mail architecture. When we proposed this project to our VP of Engineering, he rightfully asked the question of, Why should we bother continuing to maintain anything related to mail when we have an IT group to do just that? Now, this VP is no business weenie. He is extremely intelligent and highly technical (PhD from MIT at something like 22 or 23, he's now ~29). When we mentioned that a) they'd want to put us all on Exchange, and b) they're not competant to pull this off themselves, his reaction was more or less, While I hate the prospect of Exchange as much as the next guy, neither of those are 'my problem'! In other words, he's more than happy to see the IT group sink rather than swim. However, I'd rather do the right thing, just do the work and not waste a bunch of people's time or the company's money with failed (possibly outsourced) solutions, just to have to, six months from now, do the work anyway. I need to come up with (currently) valid reasons why it's a bad idea to move engineering over to an Exchange-based IMAP server from a linux/cyrus-based IMAP server. So, I'm asking for help from those of you who have current, relevant experience with running small companies (30-50 people) on Exchange. Btw, Engineering currenrtly doesn't have calendaring, and most of us would use Exchange purely as an IMAP server, not using the added benefits Exchange burdens you with. Any and all help *gratefully* accepted! Thanks. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
It'll become his problem when the server gets owned and he loses a week of e-mail. I'd say do the prep work now so if they do pull the trigger on your idea, implementation isn't that hard. This can happen regardless of the mail server. It's up to the system admins to keep the servers locked down. The only problems we ever had with exchange at the few companies I worked for were viruses being spread. This was due to stupid user error rather then the server. 1) Why use exchange? No really. If all you want is an IMAP server, what is the reason for using Exchange? Because others in the company want exchange only features and they want to centralize to one server. 2) What is the cost/benefit analysis? Exchange isn't free, nor are some of the backup applications you use to back up it's database, nor is the maintenance time required to keep a Windows box up and patched. Assume hardware costs are constant (same box running the IMAP server) and then calculate from there - how much to back up the data, how much maintenance required, how long to create/remove users. This is the biggest downfall for Exchange, the cost. If you're going to win on anything, it's going to be this. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
Ben Scott wrote: Security: I've never seen a properly administered Exchange server get owned or anything like that. The security issues are all on the client side. Actually I've had to repair several, however, it is unclear to me that they were properly administered since we were brought it to deal with the problem that the in-house administrator for each couldn't. ;-) There have been several security flaws which went unpatched for quite a few months, during which, even a properly administered server could have been owned. Exception: OWA (Outlook Web Access) is a big exposure Definitely isolate it from the rest. But, as Ben Scott said, That being said, if the IT department already pays for all of that, the cost issues evaporate. That sounds like what Mr. VP is saying: Why are we paying for email when we could get it for free? If it's IT's problem, then it doesn't matter *what* they're running on the server. That all becomes IT's problem. It only becomes Engineering's problem again if IT flubs it somehow. As long as IT provides an acceptable SLA for Engineering (one that Engineering is willing to live with, at least), then the problems are no longer Engineering's, which can then focus on Engineering tasks. If the IMAP server is business critical to Engineering (and who *doesn't* feel email is business critical nowadays :-), perhaps in the SLA you can posit a backup IMAP server for Engineering to become active if Exchange goes out. As IT would be providing that to comply with the SLA, it likely wouldn't be a Cyrus IMAP server, of course. -- Dan Jenkins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Rastech Inc., Bedford, NH, USA --- 1-603-206-9951 *** Technical Support Excellence for over a quarter century ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
That all becomes IT's problem. It only becomes Engineering's problem again if IT flubs it somehow. As long as IT provides an acceptable SLA for Engineering (one that Engineering is willing to live with, at least), then the problems are no longer Engineering's, which can then focus on Engineering tasks. If the IMAP server is business critical to Engineering (and who *doesn't* feel email is business critical nowadays :-), perhaps in the SLA you can posit a backup IMAP server for Engineering to become active if Exchange goes out. As IT would be providing that to comply with the SLA, it likely wouldn't be a Cyrus IMAP server, of course. I think these points are key. How stable is the current exchange server? If it's stable enough, then why not? I think management would rather have engineering, well, engineering things, rather then messing around with an email server that the IT department should be doing. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
On 12/23/05, Dan Jenkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Security: I've never seen a properly administered Exchange server get owned or anything like that. The security issues are all on the client side. Actually I've had to repair several however, it is unclear to me that they were properly administered since we were brought it to deal with the problem that the in-house administrator for each couldn't. Yah. Windows can be administered by an idiot -- and usually is is a big problem (for everybody, as the various big worms have demonstrated). I *have* met several Windows servers that were full of viruses. Some were running Exchange. They usually had no firewall, no patches, were running every service ever, and generally were just a big target on the 'net. I even encountered one place that used their server as a shared terminal for all the grunts without computers -- that computer's just sitting in the corner not doing anything anyway. Exception: OWA (Outlook Web Access) is a big exposure Definitely isolate it from the rest. If you *could*, that would be nice. But OWA is a full-blown MAPI client, just like Outlook proper. It needs to be able to speak the MAPI wire protocol to the Exchange back-end server, just like Outlook on a desktop PC. In order to enable that, you have to open up all the Microsoft RPC that MAPI-wire uses. At that point, you've pretty much defeated the purpose of any kind of interior firewall or DMZ. This may have changed in Exchange 2003, but I don't think it has. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
On Dec 23, 2005, at 12:55, Ben Scott wrote: This may have changed in Exchange 2003, but I don't think it has. Somebody told me Exchange 2K3 was all WebDAV, Kerberos, and LDAP. They may have been dreaming. I've seen setups where you put a postfix server in front of Exchange and cc: a copy of all the mail to an IMAP server (UWash in this case, but Cyrus or Dovecot would be more appropriate today) for when the Exchange server goes down. I've found Cyrus to be almost manageable after you figure out the small undocumented bag of tricks necessary to, say, rebuild a mailbox from message files. It suffers from the typical need to go to the mailing list for very pedestrian admin tasks. But if you need something like MURDER there's not much competition other than Dartmouth's BlitzMail in the open source space and that has its own set of unique issues. Oh, and have a look at the Fedora SPEC file - it has the large collection of essential community patches needed to run a decent mail server. That CMU won't accept these into the mainline is another problem. Oh, and if anyone needs an RPM for Cyrus with heavy logging of user activity and expunges (there's something wrong with the mail server - it _couldn't_ have been Blackberry who just deleted my Inbox) I have one available. -Bill - Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 603.252.2606 http://www.bfccomputing.com/Page: 603.442.1833 Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/ VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
On 12/23/05, Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 23, 2005, at 12:55, Ben Scott wrote: This may have changed in Exchange 2003, but I don't think it has. Somebody told me Exchange 2K3 was all WebDAV, Kerberos, and LDAP. They may have been dreaming. They may have been on crack. Or worse, Microsoft marketing material. Exchange does support all those, in one way or another. But it still has all the crufty old Exchange innards, including MAPI, X.400/X.500 and even -- *ack!* -- NetBIOS! http://support.microsoft.com/?id=837391 Exchange ... require NetBIOS name resolution for full functionality -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: IMAP experience? (was Help me avoid Exchange)
On Friday 23 December 2005 07:15 pm, Dan Jenkins wrote: I've used Courier IMAP for years, mainly because I got it running faster than Cyrus. I've often wondered since what is better with Cyrus. The documentation at the time was, politely speaking, opaque. I've just never had the time to go back and try something else. I've heard the name Dovecot, but nothing else about it. I'd appreciate others' opinions on IMAP servers. (Not attempting fork this into an IMAP flame-fest.) I'd be curious as well what others think along these lines. I've also always used Courier and kind of have a bias against Cyrus. I've heard lots of good about Dovecot, but also that it doesn't necessarily follow IMAP standards sometimes, kinda like djbdns supporting DNS. I don't like the idea that an author just decides to stray when it suits him - I'd rather inter operate with standards. It seems there aren't any other decent options for IMAP, but maybe I've missed something. I'm going to be rebuilding a new mail server for my company soon and based on how screwed up the one we have is, I am starting with a clean slate effectively. We'll setup IMAP (with SSL), webmail with SquirrelMail, SpamAssassin and ClamAV, and either Postfix or Exim for the MTA. I'd just as soon use Courier as it's what I'm used to and I've always felt that's a valuable feature of any package that faces the public. But if anyone has any particular anecdotes to share, I'd appreciate hearing them. -N ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
Dan Jenkins writes: I've used Courier IMAP for years, mainly because I got it running faster than Cyrus. I've often wondered since what is better with Cyrus. The documentation at the time was, politely speaking, opaque. I've just never had the time to go back and try something else. I've heard the name Dovecot, but nothing else about it. I'd appreciate others' opinions on IMAP servers. (Not attempting fork this into an IMAP flame-fest.) University of Washington IMAP server is pretty easy to setup, but uses mbox format, so it becomes really slow on larger mail folders (~800 messages). It doesn't take too long to become unusable. In my opinion, Cyrus is hard to setup. After two hours or so wrestling with one of its dependencies (SASL) once, I looked elsewhere. I can't deny that some people have had a lot of luck with Cyrus, but not me. I tried Dovecot once but I got the server to hang 5 times within a span of a week. I'm the only person using my server, possibly with as many as three different IMAP clients. I can't have my IMAP server hang... Courier IMAP is easy to setup and always works well for me. It uses Maildir format. I've used this for years with no problems. Regards, --kevin -- GnuPG ID: B280F24E ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Help me avoid Exchange
Hi folks, Up until now I've been fairly lucky in maintaining our IMAP server on Cyrus. However, we've identified a project which we'd like to move forward to better construct our mail architecture. When we proposed this project to our VP of Engineering, he rightfully asked the question of, Why should we bother continuing to maintain anything related to mail when we have an IT group to do just that? Now, this VP is no business weenie. He is extremely intelligent and highly technical (PhD from MIT at something like 22 or 23, he's now ~29). When we mentioned that a) they'd want to put us all on Exchange, and b) they're not competant to pull this off themselves, his reaction was more or less, While I hate the prospect of Exchange as much as the next guy, neither of those are 'my problem'! In other words, he's more than happy to see the IT group sink rather than swim. However, I'd rather do the right thing, just do the work and not waste a bunch of people's time or the company's money with failed (possibly outsourced) solutions, just to have to, six months from now, do the work anyway. I need to come up with (currently) valid reasons why it's a bad idea to move engineering over to an Exchange-based IMAP server from a linux/cyrus-based IMAP server. So, I'm asking for help from those of you who have current, relevant experience with running small companies (30-50 people) on Exchange. Btw, Engineering currenrtly doesn't have calendaring, and most of us would use Exchange purely as an IMAP server, not using the added benefits Exchange burdens you with. Any and all help *gratefully* accepted! Thanks. -- Seeya, Paul ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 03:40:54PM -0500, Paul Lussier wrote: In other words, he's more than happy to see the IT group sink rather than swim. However, I'd rather do the right thing, just do the work and not waste a bunch of people's time or the company's money with failed (possibly outsourced) solutions, just to have to, six months from now, do the work anyway. It'll become his problem when the server gets owned and he loses a week of e-mail. I'd say do the prep work now so if they do pull the trigger on your idea, implementation isn't that hard. I need to come up with (currently) valid reasons why it's a bad idea to move engineering over to an Exchange-based IMAP server from a linux/cyrus-based IMAP server. So, I'm asking for help from those of you who have current, relevant experience with running small companies (30-50 people) on Exchange. Btw, Engineering currenrtly doesn't have calendaring, and most of us would use Exchange purely as an IMAP server, not using the added benefits Exchange burdens you with. Any and all help *gratefully* accepted! Yea, assuming you're not using calendaring. 1) Why use exchange? No really. If all you want is an IMAP server, what is the reason for using Exchange? 2) What is the cost/benefit analysis? Exchange isn't free, nor are some of the backup applications you use to back up it's database, nor is the maintenance time required to keep a Windows box up and patched. Assume hardware costs are constant (same box running the IMAP server) and then calculate from there - how much to back up the data, how much maintenance required, how long to create/remove users. If you're using calendaring, well you're kinda stuck. I've never gotten Evolution to work with our Exchange server, and even if it did, it doesn't support many of the calendaring features you get in Outlook. I run Outlook in a VMware machine so my calendar works, and this is after fighting with Entourage (Mac client that uses the same protocol as Evolution) for the better part of a year. -Mark signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
Mark Komarinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 1) Why use exchange? No really. If all you want is an IMAP server, what is the reason for using Exchange? All *engineering* wants is an IMAP server. The business side already has an Exchange server. The basic argument is, Why can't Engineering just use the Exchange server as an IMAP server?. 2) What is the cost/benefit analysis? Exchange isn't free, nor are some of the backup applications you use to back up it's database, nor is the maintenance time required to keep a Windows box up and patched. Assume hardware costs are constant (same box running the IMAP server) and then calculate from there - how much to back up the data, how much maintenance required, how long to create/remove users. Ahhh, backup/restores, I hadn't considered that angle. That's a good one. Currently we back up using amanda which is quick and easy to back up to, Exchange isn't that easy :) If you're using calendaring, well you're kinda stuck. I've never gotten Evolution to work with our Exchange server, and even if it did, it doesn't support many of the calendaring features you get in Outlook. I run Outlook in a VMware machine so my calendar works, and this is after fighting with Entourage (Mac client that uses the same protocol as Evolution) for the better part of a year. Yeah, don't get me started on Entourage. I've been there before. Ever tried using that as an IMAP client? It can't do that right either ! -- Seeya, Paul ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Help me avoid Exchange
Paul Lussier wrote: Mark Komarinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 1) Why use exchange? No really. If all you want is an IMAP server, what is the reason for using Exchange? All *engineering* wants is an IMAP server. The business side already has an Exchange server. The basic argument is, Why can't Engineering just use the Exchange server as an IMAP server?. 2) What is the cost/benefit analysis? Exchange isn't free, nor are some of the backup applications you use to back up it's database, nor is the maintenance time required to keep a Windows box up and patched. Assume hardware costs are constant (same box running the IMAP server) and then calculate from there - how much to back up the data, how much maintenance required, how long to create/remove users. Ahhh, backup/restores, I hadn't considered that angle. That's a good one. Currently we back up using amanda which is quick and easy to back up to, Exchange isn't that easy :) Issues with Exchange I can think of, off the top of my head: a) The aforementioned backups - media usage, time, etc. If Engineering gets lots of large documents, which most business folk typically don't get, then the backup window shrinks and media costs manage costs for said backups could skyrocket. (At one client of mine, email disk space used for a dozen business users was a 500 MB a year. The three engineer accounts added 2 GB a week.) b) The additional licensing costs for Exchange for the additional engineering seats d) Depending on how they handle support for Exchange, possibly additional fees (I know of at least one support organization which charges for Exchange support based on the number of users.) c) Additional load on the Exchange server. Again, if engineering handles skads of large attachments, that could kill the Exchange server, if it's not capable enough. So factor in Exchange server upgrades, if needed. d) If Exchange is running antivirus too, there could be additional licensing costs. The same load issues as in (c) (Virus scanning a 150 MB email attachment can be a bit burdensome. ;-) e) Same load licensing issues for antispam measures running on Exchange. Ditto for content filtering, compliance enforcement and other email services. f) If the Exchange server is also providing other services, the extra load might impact those services. If they are business critical services...well... g) If the load issue is enough to justify a separate Exchange server, then add another Windows Server licensing cost. Of course, if load isn't an issue, then items c through g are moot. h) Depending on the version of Exchange, the default for converting MAPI messages to MIME format is HTML. While this can be changed on a user-by-user basis, if your clients don't do HTML, then they won't be able to read MAPI messages. i) I've heard of, though not encountered, about some IMAP client incompatibilities with Exchange. j) Only MAPI email clients are Outlook and OWC, as far as I know. So, Outlook or webmail via Internet Explorer. (I have had incompatibilities with OWC and non-IE browsers.) This isn't an issue for IMAP-only usage, of course, but no calendaring/workflow/etc. in that case. k) Directory (as in LDAP vs. Active Directory) additional maintenance. This raises any authentication issues as well. This may be moot in your case. Hope this helps. -- Dan Jenkins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Rastech Inc., Bedford, NH, USA --- 1-603-206-9951 *** Technical Support Excellence for over a quarter century ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
