[stuff deleted]
> So we made a BIG mistake last year implementing a new mail
> infrastructure using NFS as a mail store for our mail.
>
> This year we would like to replace this solution with a Perdition
> implementation using NIS. Anybody have comments on perdition?
>
> Here is some info about our situation;
>
> 60000 users
> 1 x P4 2Ghz for the perdition box
> 6 x Dual Xeon 2.4Ghz 1GB RAM (for ?nodes?)
We completely redid our email architecture seven months ago after years
of (poorly) relying on NFS, and perdition is a critical component.
Overall, it very works well. I have not tested STARTTLS or SSL through
it yet (planned) but works great with the UW IMAP and POP servers.
You might want to forget NIS. We had some difficulty with OpenLDAP for
the database in production (mainly due to a flakey build) so yanked it
in favor of a DBM lookup. Going back to LDAP is planned, though. We have
about 27K users.
Perdition as a standalone server doesn't do address checks like the
tcp_wrappers library, and if your IMAP or POP is started via (x)inetd
and does the checks, it won't help. The best solution is to modify
perdition to use libwrap _or_ start via (x)inetd.
We run perdition on two dual 1.4GHz Pentiums running FreeBSD 4.9-STABLE.
All of our IMAP and POP traffic goes through them, whether from desktops
or webmail systems (which also runs an IMAP proxy, so the proxy to the
proxy works great, too).
--
scott hollatz net [EMAIL PROTECTED]
information technology systems and services tel +1 218 726 8851
university of minnesota duluth mn usa fax +1 218 726 7674
--
"gabba gabba hey" - the ramones
