[IMGate] Re: user control interface
How are you currently tweaking their individual settings? I am not. Andrew P. Kaplan www.cshore.com Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months. -- Oscar Wilde -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.5 - Release Date: 12/3/2004
[IMGate] Re: user control interface
How are you currently tweaking their individual settings? I am not. However, I think the next step in offering customer the highest level of spam protection is to give them some control over the filters. However, it would need to be user specific since I wouldn't want someone to blacklist the aol mail server or open a spammer email address. Andrew P. Kaplan www.cshore.com Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months. -- Oscar Wilde -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.5 - Release Date: 12/3/2004
[IMGate] Re: need sugestions for new Imgate box
- Xeon Processor 2.4 G + - Can support At least 2 G RAM - RAID 1 with SCSI way too powerful, but what volume of msgs received/sent per day? At this point my budget is probably about $5000. for 1 box? you can buy a 1U box appropriate for 90% of MXs for $1000 max. Len
[IMGate] Re: user control interface - web based app
I'm looking for something similar. I instead of letting the users mess with the settings. I want to have a quarantine area and have each user have their own inbox that they can access over web. All spam coming to that user will go to that inbox and they and look at it and decide if they want it or not. All legit E-mail will automatically be sent to their regular inbox. Is this doable? Is this old news? right now, I just have certain rejects and spam going to one mail account that I have to check periodically. Thanks. - Original Message - From: Len Conrad [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 10:52 AM Subject: [IMGate] Re: user control interface - web based app Somebody who's done per-user modification to IMgate give us the big picture: how does the user override the admin's per-MX policies? how many users, having said they want/need per-user policies, actually spend any time futzing with their personal policies? And do these probably small number per-user adopters justify the implementing the per-user logistics on the MX of a bunch of additional programs to install AND maintain (perl mods and apps, apache, php mods and apps, etc, etc) Do you remove per-MX policies and let the user fight his own spams battles? does it scale to 25K users doing web access to the MX to play with their policies, and the MX scanning a 25K user policy database for all incoming traffic? btw, I personally don't believe in per-user policy mgmt, so I won't be adding per-user stuff to IMGate basic or advanced. AK, I think you're on the wrong track if you think per-user is the best way to improve spam blocking, since you are still running a quite basic IMGate. Apart from the probably few follow ups in this thread, discussing per-user MX is not part of IMGate so a discussion of how/why is better done on other lists, please. Len
[IMGate] Re: need sugestions for new Imgate box
Well.. I have been tinkering with vinum to get a FreeBSD box to boot from a vinum mirrored drive (plex/volume), so I in turn ask a related question. How are you mirroring the whole machine if you assume you cannot afford a high end truly hardware raid card. I have read that there really are no true ide or sata hardware raid cards except for 3ware. These card cost almost as much as a server that I might build. True, there are very good hardware scsi raid cards out there, but you could also spend more than half your 1000$ budget on a card and 2 scsi drives. So my question is how are you mirroring drives with bsd. I have quite a bit of experience with Linux but this vinum/freebsd project has been quite the learning experience. I guess if nothing else I am suggesting that how you decide to mirror your drives could easily constitute 40-80% of your budget. Now this question is totally off topic, but... during this vinum biz. I had some thoughts rolling through my head... namely, I can't think of a reason why an Imgate or other similar function servers (most of our servers) should need 64 bit pci bus? No need for gigabit, all connections over the t1s, the 64 bit PCI bus will not increase the bandwidth to the ram?, so the only thing I can come up with is... OK, so maybe there might be an advantage if you install 64 pci SCSI/raid card, but if thats the case, I have another question... do you have to be utilizing more than one scsi chain/channel to take advantage of this ? I know for a fact that you have to raid within a channel (on same scsi chain) in the high end adaptec board I have worked with. The point is.. .the person before me bought all these dell servers with serverworks chipsets and 64bit pci slots. (32 bit cpu). On Fri, 2004-12-03 at 12:29, Kenzo wrote: hmm, let me rephrase my original E-mail. I was wondering what hardware for servers you guys are using. ie: IBM xseries xxx., compaq whatever xxx. with such and such. I don't want to buy a server and have some of its components not being supported. I know that what I mentioned is over kill, but at this point I just want something that will work. I want a 1U rack that I won't have to upgrade in the next 3-5 years when E-mail traffic has doubled or tripled. I hope that helps.
