> But generaly I like to setup such thing like at my german ISP > <http://www.freenet.de/> which has ONLY <mx.freenet.de> and this > is where $USER send (SMTP) and get (IMAP/POP3) there E-Mails but > teh mailboxes are physicalay <mboxXX.freenet.de>
My setup is pretty easy really. I map each mailbox to a specific mbox server, forwarding mails to it, and proxying POP/IMAP there. The approach is popular enough that a number German providers works that way. As can be seen from headers, the third important block is mout.freenet.de to hold the queue of outgoing mails. If you want to save a little latency, I guess you could build such a setup for each country, but I doubt it is worth it. My parents use cell phones with local providers and satellite phone otherwise for accessing their mail from all around the world and latency is not their major problem, but bandwidth of their local connection is (for mail, web is a different issue). > It seems that each <mboxXX.freenet.de> can hold around 60.000 > Accounts because Freenet has around 4,5 million E-Mails and 80 > Mailbox-Servers. About, because there are different mbox servers with different storage capacities. But you got the dimensions right. A distributed approach means being able to use storage hardware as long as you can keep it working. You save on hardware, but pay on administering a more complicated setup. All you need is a router that gets active on mailbox addresses and a transport that uses "gethostbyname", "max_rcpt = 1" and "hosts" set to the storage server for the address, obtained by a lookup on the address, as well as a POP/IMAP proxy server. In theory, because the devil is in the details, and there are lots of them. Michael -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
