On 08 Apr 2003, Thomas Lamy wrote:
> I recently switched to mydns (http://mydns.bboy.net/). As all data is stored
> in a mysql (or pgsql) backend, it's easy to edit zones/resource records. And
While I see that it may be useful to have zone data in an sql
backend, I don't like the idea of plugging
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 10:24:32PM +0200, Markus Welsch wrote:
> > I've been using djbdns for a few years now, and I'm not aware of any
> > interoperability/compatibility problems between it and BIND. I've been
> > perfectly happy with djbdns.
>
> Would you mind mentioning a bit about the extense
If you have external MX boxes that are not your main mail server,
through dns you can ponit the domains you want filtered to the mx hosts,
and the other non-filtered domains to the main mail server.
I currently run a mail system somewhat like that and we use qmail with
spamassassin combined wit
> I've been using djbdns for a few years now, and I'm not aware of any
> interoperability/compatibility problems between it and BIND. I've been
> perfectly happy with djbdns.
>
Would you mind mentioning a bit about the extense of use like number of
domains, etc and very interesting would also be t
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 07:36:33PM +0200, Markus Welsch wrote:
> Well BIND is more like the standard DNS server. djbdns looks nice but
> I'm wondering about it's compability with BIND servers since the author
> is pretty much hostile to any other DNS servers.
I've been using djbdns for a few ye
hi all,
does any of you use latest version of spamassassin in your isp
environment? i'm considering installing it as content-filter (Postfix
2.07 as MTA) on both mx servers ... the only thing that holds me back is
how it responses to performance for 15 GB mail traffic / server. how are
your exp
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 12:14:50PM -0700, Splash Tekalal wrote:
> At 03:17 PM 4/8/2003 +0200, you wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 01:36:56PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> >
> >> > BIND ( http://www.isc.org/products/BIND/ )
> >>
> >> Why not? The Apache of the DNS s
8.x was/is a stable branch, but there were security issues. These are
fixed, and reason to install BIND 8.x with care (like chrooting, see the
Securing Debian Manual). There is quite a difference between unstable
(is usually referred to as development status) and insecure.
Bind 9.x had some sec
Splash Tekalal wrote:
Apache is more elegant. The only thing that can equal BIND in terms of
bloat, root exploits and general ugliness is perhaps sendmail.
Now, maybe I'm just ignorant, but are there any root exploits on Bind9?
(specifically 9.x, not anything older.. we know 8.x was unstable =P)
At 03:17 PM 4/8/2003 +0200, you wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 01:36:56PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> > BIND ( http://www.isc.org/products/BIND/ )
>
> Why not? The Apache of the DNS servers, feature-rich and very
> configurable.
Apache is more elegant. The only thing that can e
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 05, 2003 at 06:30:48PM +0200,
> Markus Welsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>
> > Which dns server would you suggest ?
>
> Why not PowerDNS http://www.powerdns.com/>, the only one which is
> fully extensible?
>
> > BIND ( http://www.isc.org/pro
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 11:41:06AM +0200, Carlos L.M. wrote:
> Perfect !! Thank you very much for all.
>
I recently started a wiki page on this at;
http://wiki.debian.net/EmailConfiguration
In there is how to configure postfix+procmail for Maildir... after this
courier-imap just works.
Pleas
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 01:36:56PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> > BIND ( http://www.isc.org/products/BIND/ )
>
> Why not? The Apache of the DNS servers, feature-rich and very
> configurable.
Apache is more elegant. The only thing that can equal BIND in terms of
bloat, root e
On Sat, Apr 05, 2003 at 06:30:48PM +0200,
Markus Welsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
a message of 29 lines which said:
> Which dns server would you suggest ?
Why not PowerDNS http://www.powerdns.com/>, the only one which is
fully extensible?
> BIND ( http://www.isc.org/products/BIND/ )
Hello Cato：
First , i must say "Thank you for ur help" :-)
You got me a very useful advices and you are right ! when i use command line
search without (-D "uid=tester,dc=ezplay,dc=tv")
its have NOT search any entry in my ldap.result as follow:
ldapsearch -W -x -h loc
Perfect !! Thank you very much for all.
--- Emmanuel Lacour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
escribió: > On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 09:42:55AM +0200,
Carlos
> L.M. wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Next week, we have to install a new server with
> > Courier IMAP, Postfix and OpenLDAP for 200 users.
> >
> > Are t
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 09:42:55AM +0200, Carlos L.M. wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Next week, we have to install a new server with
> Courier IMAP, Postfix and OpenLDAP for 200 users.
>
> Are there any site with documentation about this ??
>
I've found this :
http://annapolislinux.org/docs/plc/postfix-c
Hello,
your problem seems to be that when Apache is doing the LDAP search, it
does not get any match, while when you are doing a command line search,
you get one match.
One difference between the searches is that you specify a user which is
used to bind to the LDAP directory (-D "uid=tester,dc
Hi all,
Next week, we have to install a new server with
Courier IMAP, Postfix and OpenLDAP for 200 users.
Are there any site with documentation about this ??
And another question: How can I migrate mailbox
accounts to Maildir boxes ???
Thank you very much for your help and sorry for my bad e
19 matches
Mail list logo
