Re: [Dbmail] secure imap/pop

[Robert Claeson]

On 10 May 2006, at 04:54, Blake Mitchell wrote:

Ron Peterson wrote:

On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 03:58:16PM -0400, Ron Peterson wrote:

On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 06:06:09PM +0200, Kneschke.Lars wrote:

Ron Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:

I don't see any reference to secure imap/pop on the wiki features

correct?

request page. As far as I can tell, there is no ssl/tls support yet,

Search the wiki for stunnel or follow this link:
http://www.dbmail.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=stunnel

Maybe as a stopgap, but I'd prefer native TLS.

Just to clarify, so I don't simply sound difficult (which I am anyway,

but I try to hide it...)

I just think it would be a shame to shackle dbmail's performance
potential this way.

I've found inet (& xinet) to be a real network performance bottleneck.

That's part of the reason I run stunnel as a stand alone daemon.

I'm a fan of the modular approach, so I like that stunnel is distinct from dbmail. What do you see as the down side of that arrangement?

The overhead of extra processes and extra network communication from stunnel to dbmail.

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature