>
> This is a strange pairing. Why put SMTP traffic and Internet
> connections into the SQL box? It should be a separate SQL backend black box.
Because I think it is infinitely better than putting HTTP/SMTP on the same box.
Remember we are talking about a two server only system here. As I said before -
my logic is twofold:
1) Both iMS and SQL on Win2K are extremely stable, amd can also share the same
highend storage and backup resources - they should co-reside great - and SQL
does not generate Internet traffic anyway - iMS talks to it locally via the DSN.
2) IIS/CF (under IIS load) is much more likely to be less stable, and at the
same time does not require major storage as iMS/SQL do. The mirrored disks will
only be to boot the server and run IIS/CF - not critical data will be stored on
that machine at all - which is my intention.
>
> What about the mail storage? will you provide POP3/SMTP user
> access or just HTTP web mail?
Just HTTP for now - but opening up the POP3 port is not an issue anyway.
>
> What about the web mail server? If you intend to be one of these
> free web mail operations, our experience with Imail is that the web
> mail service is very expensive and hard to scale on one box.
Yes - well this isn't IMail is it - or PostFix for that matter - it is iMS as
per the list. I happen to think iMS can easily manage this as a two server
system - so I won't be trying to scale it on one box anyway - that is the point.
Adrian.
========================================================================
This list server is Powered by iMS
'The Swiss Army Knife of Mail Servers'
--------------------------------------
To leave this list please complete the form at
http://www.CoolFusion.com/iMS.htm
List archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/infusion-email%40eoscape.com/
========================================================================
