> Phil Howard :
> And I fully accept that as a sufficient reason to make a choice. I
> made the choice of Dovecot, having zero experience with it, because of
> my experience with Courier. Sadly, making such a choice with zero
> experience and zero knowledge of either options is the really ha
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 17:49, Steinar Bang wrote:
>> Phil Howard :
>
>> I abandoned sendmail many years ago and haven't looked back. I tried
>> qmail and postfix, and was a lot happier with postfix. I overlooked
>> exim at the time, but from what little I've seen and heard, it should
>> be
> Phil Howard :
> I abandoned sendmail many years ago and haven't looked back. I tried
> qmail and postfix, and was a lot happier with postfix. I overlooked
> exim at the time, but from what little I've seen and heard, it should
> be up there with postfix, making for a tough choice if you di
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 04:46, Chuck McManis wrote:
> So SMTP hasn't changed much in 30 years ;-) I'd be interested in what you
> consider a 'modern' MTA. I've looked pretty thoroughly at sendmail, postfix,
> and qmail and of the three qmail is fairly reliable. Not sure what makes a
> particular
On 2010-06-17 3:33 PM, Chuck McManis wrote:
> Its just a FreeBSD 8.0 system with a Marvell 8 port SATA card and a couple
> of TB of of SATA drives.
Thanks for the response... now I just have to find the time... ;)
--
Best regards,
Charles
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Charles Marcus
wrote:
> On 2010-06-17 11:52 AM, Chuck McManis wrote:
> > but I've been evaluating a ZFS based file server as well to see if it
> > can get the same level of reliability.
>
> Care to share which one? Or just a FreeBSD based one of your own making?
>
Spammers are working every day to cause more abuse. Postmasters are
trying to stay ahead of them, but we still see that over 90% of all
traffic to port 25/tcp is abuse.
Hmm, I would rather estimate it to around 99% on our multi-domain
mailserver, including the connections we deny at the
On 2010-06-17 11:52 AM, Chuck McManis wrote:
> but I've been evaluating a ZFS based file server as well to see if it
> can get the same level of reliability.
Care to share which one? Or just a FreeBSD based one of your own making?
I've been considering NexentaStor Comunity Edition. The boss doesn
Thanks for the response, some snippage to cut down on list traffic ...
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 7:14 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 12:20 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> > > 2a. mutt and alpine are both Unix console-based MUAs which
> > > understand maildir *and* IMAP. I'm
Thanks Timo.
--Chuck
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 4:34 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 17.6.2010, at 6.59, Chuck McManis wrote:
>
> > First, part of this effort was to move off of an APOP infrastructure into
> > something more secure against password eavesdropping. To that end I've
> > configured Dove
On 2010-06-17 4:46 AM, Chuck McManis wrote:
> I'd be interested in what you consider a 'modern' MTA.
postfix.
Sendmail is fine (reasonably well maintained), but much more complicated
than postfix.
qmail is basically totally unmaintained for many years.
> Between that and using tcpserver to simp
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 01:46:19AM -0700, Chuck McManis wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 12:20 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 10:59:55PM -0700, Chuck McManis wrote:
> > > In the interest of moving forward on this project
> >
> > I looked back at your other thread and at this o
On 17/06/10 14:11, William Blunn wrote:
Peter Risdon wrote:
Tarsnap is worth glancing at:
http://www.tarsnap.com/
They appear to use S3 as their back-end :-)
That's right, thought it might be relevant. It's written by Colin
Percival, FreeBSD's security officer.
They charge $0.30 / GB.m
Peter Risdon wrote:
Tarsnap is worth glancing at:
http://www.tarsnap.com/
They appear to use S3 as their back-end :-)
They charge $0.30 / GB.month compared to $0.15 / GB.month for S3, which
would seem to be within the bounds of reason if they are effectively
mapping S3 space into something
On 17/06/10 13:33, William Blunn wrote:
Ed W wrote:
How are you backing up to S3? Most of the options I have seen have
some serious issues that limit reliable full backups? Its been on my
todo list for some time now to fix the C s3fs implementation that you
find here: http://code.google.com/p
Ed W wrote:
How are you backing up to S3? Most of the options I have seen have
some serious issues that limit reliable full backups? Its been on my
todo list for some time now to fix the C s3fs implementation that you
find here: http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/ - code is shocking and could
easi
On 17/06/2010 12:19, William Blunn wrote:
Rent a virtual machine (e.g. Xen based). This saves you having to make
capital expenditure on hardware (= keeps the bean counter happy).
I haven't found virtual machines to be especially price efficient when
you need plenty of storage available? Do
On 17.6.2010, at 6.59, Chuck McManis wrote:
> First, part of this effort was to move off of an APOP infrastructure into
> something more secure against password eavesdropping. To that end I've
> configured Dovecot with simply:
>
> protocols = pop3
> service pop3-login {
> inet_listener pop3s {
>
Chuck McManis wrote:
Out of curiosity, lets say you were given the task I've set for myself which is
described thusly:
Provide a system that gives shell and email service to a dozen users, hosts
perhaps 15 or so mailing lists, provides DNS for 20 - 30 machines.
Preferred OS and what makes it
On 17/06/2010 09:46, Chuck McManis wrote:
Out of curiosity, lets say you were given the task I've set for myself
which
is described thusly:
Provide a system that gives shell and email service to a dozen users, hosts
perhaps 15 or so mailing lists, provides DNS for 20 - 30 machines.
Preferred O
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 12:20 AM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 10:59:55PM -0700, Chuck McManis wrote:
> > In the interest of moving forward on this project
>
> I looked back at your other thread and at this one, and, hmmm. I
> invite you to join us in the new millennium.
>
> 1. POP3
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 10:59:55PM -0700, Chuck McManis wrote:
> In the interest of moving forward on this project
I looked back at your other thread and at this one, and, hmmm. I
invite you to join us in the new millennium.
1. POP3 sucks.
IMAP can do everything POP3 can do, and many things P
22 matches
Mail list logo
