PostPath is a stack of pretty right there. I'm downloading the VM appliance of it right now for testing.
I'm not sure if I'd be able to get it (politics with the email admins again) but I'm definitely going to give it a shot. Seth On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 8:51 AM, Eisenberg, Wayne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Have you looked at PostPath? > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Wayne Eisenberg > > ________________________________ > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 8:45 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: TS Clusters and PST Files - Looking for Suggestions > > > "S Conn." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 05/20/2008 01:49:16 AM: > >> Hey guys I'm looking for suggestions. Here's the deal. I have NO >> Exchange server. Management won't buy it, too expensive, especially >> since Linux alternatives are "cheaper". I've been fighting this >> losing battle for years now. If I did have Exchange, the upcoming >> question would be null. > > I used to run a small Exchange 5.5, then upgraded to Ex 2007, for like 60 > users. Linux alternatives (if all you're looking for is mail, and not things > like shared/workgroup calenders, public folders, etc), then Linux probably > would be cheaper, both in upfront license costs, hardware requirements, and > time maintaining. > >> All 400+ of my users are using POP3 with Outlook 2003 or 2007. I just >> gotten the ability to do IMAP, but the trick there is that there is a >> 90 day message limit on the server. This causes issues with many >> users since they like to keep EVERYTHING. > > So the POP server is *not* one you control? > > And every user wants to either keep everything forever, or not keep anything > ever. :-) > >> Setting up local PSTs on most user's PCs is ok, especially since most >> users understand the risks associated with doing so. Where I'm >> running into issues is on my Terminal Servers. I have a few >> "stand-alone" Terminal Servers, where users are assigned one specific >> server and that's it. They have a local profile on these servers, so >> their PSTs don't move across the network at all. I'm not using Citrix >> here, just normal Windows 2003 Terminal Server. > > I'd go IMAP (probably Courier) on Linux, if it were me, and you're not > looking for collaboration (such as calendaring; there are other > add-ons/programs for that, none quite as easy or integrated as Exchange). > This presumes that I can run and control my own Linux server, of course. You > can even web front-end it, using sqwebmail or Squirrelmail (which I prefer). > >> >> My current setup will not last. I need to find a way to either not >> use the PST files at all or find a way to reliably provide access to >> PSTs without killing my network. I thought about using a logon/logoff >> script to copy the PSTs to/from the network shares, but I'm afraid >> that it'll be too slow (my users like to have 1gb+ PSTs) and it won't >> handle non-logoff situations well (like a sudden reboot). > > Yeah, I don't think that'll work well. You're trying to emulate offline > files then. > >> >> Does anyone have any suggestions, workarounds, or solutions? Anyone >> dealing with this issue now or found a way to deal with it? >> >> I really appreciate your help and suggestions on this. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Seth > > So your POP server is owned and maintained by your ISP? Do they offer IMAP > services? > > Good luck. > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
