check this one too: http://www.unixcities.com/pop3-and-smtp-proxy/
Cheers Szemir On October 15, 2006 18:52, Gustin Johnson wrote: > First, squid and apache can do the same proxy task, and I know that you > already know how to do this in apache, so the web side is covered > (besides, Apache has support for vhosts, so you don't really need a > reverse proxy). SSL only cares about the name of the server, so the > cert for sample.domain.tld must resolve to the outside IP, so that end > users don't get a warning pop up. > > SSH is fugly because of the host verification part. I do not remember > there being an easy solution to this, but I will check the SSH book I > have kicking around, I am pretty sure this scenario was covered. > > Cyrus (provides POP(S)/IMAP(S)) has support for vhosts, where the > username is either the full email address or all usernames must be > unique, so no [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] Of course all > email is on the same server (or same cluster, so the same logical server > from the end users point of view). I have been using cyrus for a long > time, so I have 50+ domains where each username is unique. > > There are some POP/IMAP proxies out there. I have never used any of > them, nor do I know if they work with SSL/TLS services. SMTP + TLS + > Auth could also be a problem for you. > > Most hosting companies use vhost for web, and their own server for mail, > the end user does not get their own mail server (unless we are dealing > with colocation or managed server, in which case you also get your own > IP). Most people could care less about the technical details of email, > including most of the admins I know (Exchange Admins are particularly > bad, I have no idea why a frighteningly large number of them turn off > retries and other sensible mail settings. Badly configured Exchange > servers account for ~9 out 10 email problems my clients experience). > > One question that pops into my head, is why each server needs its own > distinct mail server? > > Hope this helps, > > Shawn wrote: > > bogi wrote: > >> Now, if you would have say 5 ip addresses, and pick them all up in the > >> single red interface (virtual), it would be easy to use iptables to > >> foreword the traffic accordingly. > > > > But even with 5 IP addresses, you will eventually run into a situation > > where you want service X to have the usual public port, but need to be > > forwarded to 5 or more servers based on domain name. > > > > Right away I can see say 6 domains, each of which need ssh access. How > > do you handle the 6th domain without resorting to using different ports? > > Replace ssh with FTP, or POP3, or IMAP, or... > > > > I know this problem has been handled - take a look at all the hosting > > companies out there that provide web/mail/ftp services to multiple > > domains, but have a small pool of IP addresses. > > > > I also know I can get my current situation working by fudging each of > > the services individually. But there has to be a better way. Something > > like "all traffic for domain x.com goes to internal IP x.x.x.x, but ftp > > traffic for that domain goes to y.y.y.y", but the domain must be the > > domain name - not the resolved IP. > > > > Kinda like a reverse proxy - but for more than http. > > > > Still digging.... > > > > Shawn > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > clug-talk mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca > > Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) > > **Please remove these lines when replying > > _______________________________________________ > clug-talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca > Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) > **Please remove these lines when replying _______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [email protected] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) **Please remove these lines when replying
