RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Clustering solution
Database mirroring is not the same as clustering. You dont need the same kind of resources and licenses. Robert E. Spivack VP Sales Marketing Voicegateway.com Web Services / SPIV Technologies Group (408) 834-8560 [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 10:26 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Clustering solution I did get a price from Dell for 2 licenses to run a SQL cluster for an internet application. Got it in writing too. Price for the Microsoft software only: $54,000 Robert E. Spivack wrote: If using SQL Server 2005, the new database mirroring (aka real-time logshipping) is an excellent solution if you would rather put your $$$into SQL Server licenses (enterprise edition required) and hardwareinstead of a 3rd party app.An advantage of using Microsoft Database Mirroring is that you canremain on a 100% Microsoft supported solution. Assuming aclustered/mission-critical installation would want to insure they haveaccess to PSS (Microsoft product support) for any critical situations,this could be a decisive factor over choosing a 3rd party genericclustering or C/SFS (clustered/storage file system) solution.I'd be curious to hear if Sandy or anyone has compared db mirroring todouble-take and other solutions that made sense before this feature wasavailable but may be less desirable now.Robert E. SpivackVP Sales MarketingVoicegateway.com Web Services / SPIV Technologies Group(408) 834-8560[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf OfSanford WhitemanSent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 4:27 PMTo: Sanford WhitemanSubject: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Clustering solution Seriously, what's low? ...I ask because clustering's ROI is kind of a hard target.Unfortunately, I almost always find it easier to justify clusteringsolutions for my clients *after* they haven't heeded an initialclustering suggestion and have had outages and/or data loss (or if Iget them as I clients after such an incident).We use Double-Take as a pseudo-standard, as it has broad industrysupport and works equally well over the local and wide area. It'sgoing to run you upwards of $3500 for one two-server cluster. Is thatlow?I've demoed and am intrigued by XGForce's eClusterhttp://www.xgforce.com/news_eCluster.html, which has much moreaccessible pricing. I plan to purchase it in place of DT for my nextrollout and see if I can trust it. But for now, I can't vouch for it,though if you get into it, please let me know. :)--SandySanford Whiteman, Chief TechnologistBroadleaf Systems, a division ofCypress Integrated Systems, Inc.e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]SpamAssassin plugs into Declude! http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/download/release/Defuse Dictionary Attacks: Turn Exchange or IMail mailboxes into IMailAliases! http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/exchange2aliases/download/release/ http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/ldap2aliases/download/release/---This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. Tounsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], andtype unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be foundat http://www.mail-archive.com.---This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. Tounsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], andtype unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be foundat http://www.mail-archive.com. ---This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. Tounsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], andtype "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be foundat http://www.mail-archive.com. ---This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. Tounsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], andtype "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be foundat http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: Re[4]: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Clustering solution
SPLA licensing is very affordable. There are no SPLA licenses for many 3rd party products so staying with Microsoft is actually cheaper if you are a service provider. Robert E. Spivack VP Sales Marketing Voicegateway.com Web Services / SPIV Technologies Group (408) 834-8560 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sanford Whiteman Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 11:21 PM To: Robert E. Spivack Subject: Re[4]: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Clustering solution An advantage of using Microsoft Database Mirroring is that you can remain on a 100% Microsoft supported solution. Sure, but for the cost, you can have a full-time NSI engineer instead (who by necessity and experience knows their supported MS apps like the back of her/his hand). Many 24/7 enterprises leave the PSS fine print behind to use third-party clustering solutions that better fit their needs. Bottom line is you have to do your homework in all areas to be able to support geoclusters or local clusters. [Also, to be frank about these things, there's nothing forcing you divulge an underlying clustering scenario to PSS. There's a difference between trying to fool them into a wild goose chase, and knowing from experience -- and comparison with a cluster-free lab -- that an issue is 99.999% likely to be observed even if the cluster is taken down and uninstalled, and thus acting in good faith in concentrating on the issue at hand.] I'd be curious to hear if Sandy or anyone has compared db mirroring to double-take and other solutions that made sense before this feature was available but may be less desirable now. I haven't, mostly due to the cost, but also because I more often find myself clustering apps that wouldn't apply (Sybase, Exchange, nonupgradeable MSSQL 2000, mailbox storage back ends and filesystems, MySQL, and so on). Someday, if somebody's really running the table with MS products and has overflowing pockets, I'd be interested in looking into it. --Sandy Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist Broadleaf Systems, a division of Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc. e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SpamAssassin plugs into Declude! http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/download/rel ease/ Defuse Dictionary Attacks: Turn Exchange or IMail mailboxes into IMail Aliases! http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/exchange2aliases/dow nload/release/ http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/ldap2aliases/downloa d/release/ --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: Re[6]: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Clustering solution
Not correct. Database mirroring is supported in Std Edition, but you need two licenses. The third server, the witness server can be an XP OS and SQL Server 2005 Express (Free version) can be used on the witness server since it does a crucial function but doesn't do any heavy processing. You can run without the witness server, but then you don't automatic failover. And of course, you need to be using the new SQL server 2005 native client libraries on the client stations for transparent/automatic failover. Robert E. Spivack VP Sales Marketing Voicegateway.com Web Services / SPIV Technologies Group (408) 834-8560 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sanford Whiteman Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 6:01 PM To: Robert Grosshandler Subject: Re[6]: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Clustering solution SQL Database Mirroring is available in their Standard Edition, and I believe that in a Active / Passive architecture, only one license is required. Strange but true, from what I can see! This convo has stirred my interest in this thing, though I'll stick with the app-independent Double-Take by default. --Sandy Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist Broadleaf Systems, a division of Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc. e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SpamAssassin plugs into Declude! http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/download/rel ease/ Defuse Dictionary Attacks: Turn Exchange or IMail mailboxes into IMail Aliases! http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/exchange2aliases/dow nload/release/ http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/ldap2aliases/downloa d/release/ --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: Re[8]: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Clustering solution
There are some big differences between clustering and database mirroring. Clustering requires running Microsoft approved storage hardware and must be iSCSI or fiber channel. That imposes a physical distance limitation between the two servers. With mirroring, you only need an IP connection between them. You could actually have one on the East Coast and the other on the West Coast or somewhere in between so geographic diversity / location redundancy is possible whereas clustering implies both servers are in the same data center let alone the same city, state, locale. Mirroring is actually much easier to setup than clustering. Just a few quick clicks on setup/configuration and it's done. The witness server is optional. The concept is similar to clustering with MNV (majority node voting). The witness or 3rd server is needed to avoid deadlock if there is a comm. link failure between two servers each could declare itself the primary and the other dead so the witness is needed to resolve the deadlock. That's why auto-failure requires a witness server. Without a witness server, you have manual failover because a human is required to determine which server has failed and whether to force a fail over to the second server. Robert E. Spivack VP Sales Marketing Voicegateway.com Web Services / SPIV Technologies Group (408) 834-8560 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sanford Whiteman Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 8:43 PM To: Robert E. Spivack Subject: Re[8]: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Clustering solution Not correct. Database mirroring is supported in Std Edition, but you need two licenses. Hmm, the Hor$e's Mouth disagrees: http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/passive-server-failover-support.ms px The third server, the witness server can be an XP OS and SQL Server 2005 Express (Free version) can be used on the witness server since it does a crucial function but doesn't do any heavy processing. A regrettably complex architecture, compared to the simplicity of clustering. Kind of crazy, actually. Seems perhaps you can run the witness server as a different instance, or at least in a VM, instead of ponying up for a 3rd piece of hardware... ? Yuck, no matter what. And of course, you need to be using the new SQL server 2005 native client libraries on the client stations for transparent/automatic failover. Sounds like another reason this is not necessarily implementable in full, depending on your client layout, fixed commercial applications, and so on. BUT overall, we're comparing apples and oranges. OP (Serge) is talking about clustering Hyper File (the proprietary WINDEV back end), which means he needs an application-agnostic solution: Double-Take, eCluster, Microsoft clusters, etc. --Sandy Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist Broadleaf Systems, a division of Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc. e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SpamAssassin plugs into Declude! http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/download/rel ease/ Defuse Dictionary Attacks: Turn Exchange or IMail mailboxes into IMail Aliases! http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/exchange2aliases/dow nload/release/ http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/ldap2aliases/downloa d/release/ --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Clustering solution
If using SQL Server 2005, the new database mirroring (aka real-time log shipping) is an excellent solution if you would rather put your $$$ into SQL Server licenses (enterprise edition required) and hardware instead of a 3rd party app. An advantage of using Microsoft Database Mirroring is that you can remain on a 100% Microsoft supported solution. Assuming a clustered/mission-critical installation would want to insure they have access to PSS (Microsoft product support) for any critical situations, this could be a decisive factor over choosing a 3rd party generic clustering or C/SFS (clustered/storage file system) solution. I'd be curious to hear if Sandy or anyone has compared db mirroring to double-take and other solutions that made sense before this feature was available but may be less desirable now. Robert E. Spivack VP Sales Marketing Voicegateway.com Web Services / SPIV Technologies Group (408) 834-8560 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sanford Whiteman Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 4:27 PM To: Sanford Whiteman Subject: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Clustering solution Seriously, what's low? ...I ask because clustering's ROI is kind of a hard target. Unfortunately, I almost always find it easier to justify clustering solutions for my clients *after* they haven't heeded an initial clustering suggestion and have had outages and/or data loss (or if I get them as I clients after such an incident). We use Double-Take as a pseudo-standard, as it has broad industry support and works equally well over the local and wide area. It's going to run you upwards of $3500 for one two-server cluster. Is that low? I'vedemoedandamintriguedbyXGForce's eCluster http://www.xgforce.com/news_eCluster.html, which has much more accessible pricing. I plan to purchase it in place of DT for my next rollout and see if I can trust it. But for now, I can't vouch for it, though if you get into it, please let me know. :) --Sandy Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist Broadleaf Systems, a division of Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc. e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SpamAssassin plugs into Declude! http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/download/rel ease/ Defuse Dictionary Attacks: Turn Exchange or IMail mailboxes into IMail Aliases! http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/exchange2aliases/dow nload/release/ http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/ldap2aliases/downloa d/release/ --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 4.3
Correction David B, Postini offers a great product, it's Declude with the product that is questionable. We switched most of our services over to Postini and have been glad to avoid the bugs, crashes, and huge price hikes of Declude. In comparison, as our Postini volume grows, our costs are actually going down. Managed services is growing, but managed spam blocking and av is actually stagnent. Postini and others (choose your favorite leader) already have most the market. Just ask most end-users --- it no longer is a question of do you have av or spam blocking protection - most everyone does. It's a tougher issue of how well does it work - good enough is unfortunately the answer from many people and not good enough but I won't pay a dime more for something better is the answer from the rest. As evidenced by Postini, Microsoft, and other activity, the CAGR growth is coming from enhanced services such as archiving (SOX compliance), encryption, collaboration, and other newer value-added email services. As mentioned by others, av scanning and spam blocking is commoditized. Sure, that doesn't mean there will not continue to be incremental technology improvements and some smaller vendors will eek out some growth continuing to offer slightly better technical solutions, but in the overall market, the chance for a big win by new players in av/spam blocking services is past. game over guys - time to come up with some new tricks besides trying to squeeze your best advocates for more money. F-Prot, Declude, who next will be hurting and trying to survive by raising prices? In a commodity market with many suppliers, that's not a winning strategy. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Barker Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 2:09 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 4.3 Matt, Managed services is the fastest growing segment of this industry, CAGR forecasted at 25% per year through 2009. While the industry may seem commoditized, you have pointed out that businesses like Postini offer a poor product but are projecting $100,000,000 in revenues. So I'd say there is plenty of revenue to cannibalize if Declude works with Service Providers to empower them to offer premium services and help market and promote those services. This is the idea behind our Service Provider Program. I don't think we're being greedy, but rather trying to get creative and help the small guys compete against the big guys. If you have any questions or would like to speak to someone about the program please call or email: Arik[EMAIL PROTECTED] Kristina[EMAIL PROTECTED] David B www.declude.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 4:07 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 4.3 David, What makes the good folk at Declude and CommTouch believe that there is any revenue to share? For the majority of service providers that are Declude customers, spam blocking is a 100% cost center, and for the few that offer a gateway service, none of us are getting rich, in fact the astounding greed that software companies have presented us with in the last 5 years combined with competitive pressures of cheap or even free services has commoditized much of what we are doing. I have absolutely no revenue to share with Declude or CommTouch outside of reasonable software licensing fees. The only revenue that I share is with those that generate business for my company. If I get rich off of doing what I am doing, it will be primarily the result of my blood, sweat and tears, otherwise there would be 10,000 others just like me. Matt David Barker wrote: There are restrictions on CommTouch being used by Service Providers we had to ensure that NEW customers (ie. Service Providers After 1 June 06) understand the licensing restrictions. Current Service Providers (ie. Before 1 June 06) are under no restrictions for using Declude; only the CommTouch add-in component. However we have managed to come to an agreement with CommTouch to enable our legacy customers (ie. Service Providers Before 1 June 06) to take advantage of CommTouch under a revenue share program, this program is not being forced onto legacy customers but will be an opportunity for us to help you increase revenues in your business, by providing you with new product like the Declude Gateway which would be independent of Imail/SmarterMail and will include CommTouch. David B www.declude.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John T (Lists) Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 3:02 PM To:
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Monitoring/Auditing a Windows Server
MRTG is free but a pain to setup and reporting is limited. Some swear by Cacti, but setup is also complex. A reasonable cost effective tool is Paessler. Windows-specific, but well implemented and supported. http://www.paessler.com/ It has a packet capture mode (aka sniffer) which will do a lot more than just snmp counting and exports reports to pdf From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Goran Jovanovic Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 10:04 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Monitoring/Auditing a Windows Server Hi Robert, All very good questions. The client is paying for piece work as opposed to an hourly rate so monitoring time spent against time billed is not a concern. Mostly they want to know if the developers are using the environment that has been provided to them. 2 SQL servers, 2 web servers, 2 application servers. Comments like did they just upload the new stuff the day before the deliverable date? Are they using the environment that was provided for 5 minutes a day or hours per day? I am thinking of it as more of a validation of the whole support environment for the developers rather than did they update/fix that web page. Monitoring the host machines via SNMP might be an idea. Any simple (but good) tool leap to mind? Thanks Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert E. Spivack Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 7:01 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Monitoring/Auditing a Windows Server Lets start at the high-level: What question are you trying to answer? e.g: Are the developers spending enough time doing the work they should be doing? Are the developers doing things they should not be doing? Are the developers competent and performing their job properly? Are the developers hours spent working matching their timesheets/project sheets? Etc. There are different solutions depending upon your objectives. Note: Personally, for outsourcing I pay based on a project or deliverable so tracking time/usage is of no interest to me. I pay for a certain result and dont care if it takes an hour or a week to do it. Also, I audit the quality of the finished product/code/service, I dont care about the tools/methods used to reach that goal. In your case: Since you have a virtual server environment, you can also audit at the host level. E.g. you can run SNMP tools and measure traffic (bps and total bytes in/out) on the virtual network ports of the virtual machine to see the activity level. You can see the protocol (http, http, netbios, smb, etc.) to see what type of activity is flowing through the machine. If you run the tool in a virtual machine on the same physical host, it can use packet capture to fully analyze the traffic and not just SNMP/WMI. You might consider re-writing your outsourcing contract. You really shouldnt have to police the project/micromanage it. Afterall, management of outsourcing is the hidden cost that can eat you alive and remove any cost benefits so why allow yourself to fall into that black hole? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Goran Jovanovic Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 1:09 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Monitoring/Auditing a Windows Server It is a dev/staging server running in a virtual server environment so I have to be a bit careful what I turn on or dont. I tried the auditing a file. Wow talk about generating Security Event Log records. I turned auditing on for two files bginfo.exe and its corresponding config.bgi file. Then I ran it to generate the background on file server. That simple little thing created 15 log entries. If we turn this on we are going to need something to parse the security log file as I can see that it is going to produce a HUGE amount traffic in there. Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shaun Mickey Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 3:34 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Monitoring/Auditing a Windows Server You could also enable auditing in Windows to examine file level access, just r-click on any file/folder and select properties, click on the security tab then click advanced then click on the auditing tab. WARNING: auditing a lot of high-use files could strain the server That being said, your on a dev server so it should be alright, though I would keep the number of files youre auditing to a minimum or as small a group as possible Thanks, Shaun --- Shaun Mickey 270net Technologies Phone: 301.663.6000 x28 Fax: 301.663.4410 www.270net.com Internet/Technology Solutions for Business and Government
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Monitoring/Auditing a Windows Server
Lets start at the high-level: What question are you trying to answer? e.g: Are the developers spending enough time doing the work they should be doing? Are the developers doing things they should not be doing? Are the developers competent and performing their job properly? Are the developers hours spent working matching their timesheets/project sheets? Etc. There are different solutions depending upon your objectives. Note: Personally, for outsourcing I pay based on a project or deliverable so tracking time/usage is of no interest to me. I pay for a certain result and dont care if it takes an hour or a week to do it. Also, I audit the quality of the finished product/code/service, I dont care about the tools/methods used to reach that goal. In your case: Since you have a virtual server environment, you can also audit at the host level. E.g. you can run SNMP tools and measure traffic (bps and total bytes in/out) on the virtual network ports of the virtual machine to see the activity level. You can see the protocol (http, http, netbios, smb, etc.) to see what type of activity is flowing through the machine. If you run the tool in a virtual machine on the same physical host, it can use packet capture to fully analyze the traffic and not just SNMP/WMI. You might consider re-writing your outsourcing contract. You really shouldnt have to police the project/micromanage it. Afterall, management of outsourcing is the hidden cost that can eat you alive and remove any cost benefits so why allow yourself to fall into that black hole? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Goran Jovanovic Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 1:09 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Monitoring/Auditing a Windows Server It is a dev/staging server running in a virtual server environment so I have to be a bit careful what I turn on or dont. I tried the auditing a file. Wow talk about generating Security Event Log records. I turned auditing on for two files bginfo.exe and its corresponding config.bgi file. Then I ran it to generate the background on file server. That simple little thing created 15 log entries. If we turn this on we are going to need something to parse the security log file as I can see that it is going to produce a HUGE amount traffic in there. Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shaun Mickey Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 3:34 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Monitoring/Auditing a Windows Server You could also enable auditing in Windows to examine file level access, just r-click on any file/folder and select properties, click on the security tab then click advanced then click on the auditing tab. WARNING: auditing a lot of high-use files could strain the server That being said, your on a dev server so it should be alright, though I would keep the number of files youre auditing to a minimum or as small a group as possible Thanks, Shaun --- Shaun Mickey 270net Technologies Phone: 301.663.6000 x28 Fax: 301.663.4410 www.270net.com Internet/Technology Solutions for Business and Government --- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darin Cox Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 3:16 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Monitoring/Auditing a Windows Server Source code activity would be best analyzed with Visual SourceSafe or another code control system. For watching use of the sites for testing, etc. just enable logging for the virtual webs and run reports on the web traffic. Darin. - Original Message - From: Goran Jovanovic To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 2:35 PM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Monitoring/Auditing a Windows Server Hi All, This is definitely an off topic question. I have a client that wants to monitor what their outsourced developers are doing. The development is taking place in IIS, .Net Application Server and SQL 2000. They want to know generally speaking what they are doing. Are the development servers being used/tested? Would not have to report on what exactly is being changed etc but some sort of activity report. Does anyone know of anything that can report on this type of activity. Thanks Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Storage Server (NAS)
Stay away from Open-E - its closed and proprietary as far as expandability. Its just Linux in Flash module with a GUI. They charge extra to use a hardware raid controller, faster NICs, and nickel and dime other options too. It only supports a limited choice of approved hardware. If you want Linux, just use Linux. Any linux pro can setup Linux and Samba in under half an hour. If you want a cute Linux appliance, you might consider the new Intel SS4000. Has falconstor OEM Linux software in flash and includes 4 SATA hot-swap drives. But only runs as a NAS , is not AD integrated and is in a minitower form factor versus rackmount. Aimed at the home market but pricier than Buffalo, Iomega, and the other home NAS units. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 3:22 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Storage Server (NAS) Kevin, If there was any way to talk the boss out of Windows for this, I would definitely consider Open-E. It's less than $1,000 for the Enterprise version of their latest product. It also has the advantage of running completely off of flash, leaving the hard drives to just doing storage, and should be more reliable. It can be integrated with AD. Unless you are running Windows Storage Server and utilize some proprietary feature, Open-E would be transparent to end-users. http://www.open-e.com/nasxsr/network_attached_storage/NAS-XSR_comp_chart.php?lang=en Matt Kevin Bilbee wrote: That is correct. If we go with SuperMicro we will purchase Windows Standard from the open license program. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 2:56 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Storage Server (NAS) Kevin, I believe that Windows Storage Server is only available from OEM's and can't be purchased seperately. Matt Kevin Bilbee wrote: Price.My budget is 3200 for the hardware and software. Our CFO and IT directoralso has a requirement of windows server.Kevin Bilbee -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Troy D. HiltonSent: Friday, May 12, 2006 12:53 PMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Storage Server (NAS)Why not use a SnapServer?Troy D. HiltonServeon, Inc.[EMAIL PROTECTED]302-529-8640 -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kevin BilbeeSent: Friday, May 12, 2006 2:26 PMTo: JunkMail DecludeSubject: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Storage Server (NAS)We are looking for a storage server to do our nightly backups to and ourdesktop user backups.1U Rack1gig Ram4 SATA hot swapableWindows storage serverany suggestions?Kevin BilbeeNetwork AdministratorStandard Abrasives, Inc.[EMAIL PROTECTED](805) 520-5800 x7332Changing the way industry works.---This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. Tounsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], andtype unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be foundat http://www.mail-archive.com. ---This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. Tounsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], andtype unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be foundat http://www.mail-archive.com. ---This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. Tounsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], andtype unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be foundat http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT - Surgemail
Haven't tried it, but the support costs look astronomical. Have you considered SmarterMail? Many IMail customers have switched to SmarterMail as it integrates fairly well with Declude, has most of the existing features of IMail, and has many other features still not supported in IMail. It's written in native ASP.NET so has a web services interface for a nice clean API that is modern versus batch files or proprietary API (or none at all). It has some warts, but the cost is very affordable -- full licenses are less than just the annual renewal support costs for IMail. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Orin Wells Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 11:43 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] OT - Surgemail Does anyone have experience with Surgemail? If so what can you say about it positive or negative. How do you feel it compares with iMail? I as because my partner has been pushing me to look at Surgemail since we are in the midst of a major migration on our mail server (we will actually have a separate mail server) If anyone has moved a server from iMail to Surgemail, what/how was the experience? --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Live Web Log Analyzer
Sure - if you don't mind giving up all your privacy to Google and letting
them peek at your web traffic.
BTW - almost all web analytic tools offer embedded tracking options in
lieu off, or in addition to, log file parsing.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 8:50 AM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Live Web Log Analyzer
It's off-topic for this off-topic thread, but Google Analytics at
http://www.google.com/analytics/
is pretty nifty for non-ISP purposes. To get it working though, you need
to edit every page your want to report on with a bit of javascript which
phones home to Google; it doesn't work by analyzing your web logs.
Andrew 8)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 9:26 AM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Live Web Log Analyzer
Hi,
I've been running LiveStats ISP, but it's been terribly buggy
for larger sites (not to speak of the fact, that its database
columns are too small to deal with high volume sites -
e.g., you can have more than 204 GB bandwidth in any given
period, such as weekly or monthly). Now they don't even
respond to requests to update me on the status of my reported problems
- while the system has been down for 2 weeks due to a
reproducible failure.
Webtrends has never been shining either, with respect to
stability and/or support.
I do need an IIS web log analyzer that:
A) offers ad-hoc ('live') reporting
B) uses a database structure that does not limit volume
(e.g., a JET database won't do).
What is everyone else out there using?
Best Regards
Andy Schmidt
Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
Fax:+1 201 934-9206
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be
found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Live Web Log Analyzer
What version are you using? The Current versions are Livestats.XSP or
Livestats.NET versions are V8.xx
The earlier versions were a lot more buggy - this version is very solid
since they eliminator the collector tasks and just use direct file access
or ftp to access the log files.
I do wish they would stop changing the user interface dramatically with
every release -- they think they are car dealers and need a model change
all the time.
The latest UI is actually not as nice as the prior one, but the
functionality continues to improve nicely.
We don't have any individual sites as busy as the one you mention. I
suspect everyone will say their solution works for them as most software
works well or doesn't show problems until you really push it past the
limits.
You'll probably need to test anything else you might want to use to see if
it can handle the amount of data you are dealing with.
If you still have the raw logs, then you could easily setup up an isolated
test environment to see how well they can work with your data sizes.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 9:26 AM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Live Web Log Analyzer
Hi,
I've been running LiveStats ISP, but it's been terribly buggy for larger
sites (not to speak of the fact, that its database columns are too small to
deal with high volume sites - e.g., you can have more than 204 GB
bandwidth in any given period, such as weekly or monthly). Now they don't
even respond to requests to update me on the status of my reported problems
- while the system has been down for 2 weeks due to a reproducible failure.
Webtrends has never been shining either, with respect to stability and/or
support.
I do need an IIS web log analyzer that:
A) offers ad-hoc ('live') reporting
B) uses a database structure that does not limit volume (e.g., a JET
database won't do).
What is everyone else out there using?
Best Regards
Andy Schmidt
Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
Fax:+1 201 934-9206
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Microsoft Open License
A professional business does not use grey market licenses. Yes, you should switch to Linux so you can get what you pay for and not whine about it. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 8:34 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Microsoft Open License Robert, I think that did a good amount of research and I do in fact have my facts straight. It appears rather that you just simply didn't read my message fully. At this moment, SPLA isn't a good deal for me, though I recognize that in some situations it can be. I like to buy full retail versions of Windows in the gray market of eBay, and when you compare gray market prices to SPLA, the gray market compares much more favorably when you are buying for yourself. I also have been basing all of my servers on dual processor systems as a way to maximize the value of the software running on them, and the terms for dual-processor licenses under SPLA is not competitive whatsoever for servers. In my original reply, I linked to a pricing sheet that is freely available from the public website of one of Microsoft's two main suppliers of SPLA licenses, so I am in fact aware of the prices. As I said before, this is something like the third iteration of a pay-as-you-go licensing scheme by Microsoft in just 5 years. In fact, up until last year you also had to be a MCP and join the Microsoft Partner Program at $1,500/year. For a small hosting provider, adding that cost overhead and time to one or a few licenses makes it cost prohibitive. While they did change this, they only did so recently, and parts of their site are still out of date with the changes. The frequency of changes and their admission on their own site that they screwed up badly in the past by having confusing terms and uncompetitive pricing doesn't make me feel at ease with this. I also don't like grossly uncompetitive markets such as limited availability and a requirement for membership in three different Microsoft programs. By limiting access to primarily two resellers of SPLA licenses, they have also created an anti-competitive market. I also don't work for Microsoft, and I don't wish to be reporting back to them or their partners on a monthly basis for the type of operations that I currently have. Microsoft didn't create SPLA to lose money. Part of this was due to competitive pressures from the low overhead of a rapid Linux build-out in bulk hosting, but another part of it was clearly to establish a method of charging based on the success of their customers (per-processor licensing) instead of being based on the software's capabilities itself, and to force more rapid adoption of their latest technologies by removing the asset of purchased software and lowering the overhead to upgrading. Unfortunately for Microsoft, Windows 2000 still works great as a Web server 6 years after it's release. If Microsoft wanted to stay competitive in all senses, they would have made SPLA completely optional as far as their EULA goes, but they purposefully change it. This change was anti-consumer. I don't like anti-consumer changes. I'm considering SPLA for possibly doing some managed server co-location because I recognize the high upfront costs and competitive pressures where some expect their colo to provide such things in one package. I agree that SPLA makes perfect sense for single processor servers leased in bulk to customers. For my own servers however, I already own licenses for everything and I would definitely be paying substantially more with SPLA over the life of the software under the present terms. I purchased my retail versions of Microsoft software to be used exactly as they were clearly and consistently represented to me by Microsoft, and I will continue to use them that way. In the mean time, I am going to start working on getting a Linux hosting environment going because I don't want to get trapped by Microsoft's licensing going forward. Matt Robert E. Spivack wrote: Matt, get the facts before you rant. If you are running a business then you should be adhering to the rules. I cant believe you have been hosting sites/email services for so long and not been aware of SPLA. I think your rant is totally offbase. Let me give you (and others lurking) the overall view: The SPLA is an incredibly great program for service providers (which you are). It allows you to completely avoid buying expensive software upfront and is entirely a pay-as-you-go program. For those not familiar with it, you report to Microsoft on a monthly basis what product licenses you are using and you pay only for the licenses in use. Specific example: You are a small hosting company and land a client that wants a dedicated server with dual Xeons running SQL Server 2000 or 2005. With a retail license (which isnt legal for hosting anyway) you would have
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Microsoft Open License
Matt, get the facts before you rant. If you are running a business then you should be adhering to the rules. I cant believe you have been hosting sites/email services for so long and not been aware of SPLA. I think your rant is totally offbase. Let me give you (and others lurking) the overall view: The SPLA is an incredibly great program for service providers (which you are). It allows you to completely avoid buying expensive software upfront and is entirely a pay-as-you-go program. For those not familiar with it, you report to Microsoft on a monthly basis what product licenses you are using and you pay only for the licenses in use. Specific example: You are a small hosting company and land a client that wants a dedicated server with dual Xeons running SQL Server 2000 or 2005. With a retail license (which isnt legal for hosting anyway) you would have to immediately go and buy a two-processor license for SQL Server. At going rates, that is approx $10,000 retail (before discounts). Now, after two months, that client goes broke, cant pay their bills and obviously cancels their contract (or you cancel it for default). Now you are stuck with $10,000 of software and no cash. Under SPLA, you would simply report to Microsoft that you are no longer using the license and pay nothing to them anymore. Although the pricing for SPLA is not public, it is widely available but I wont give the actual pricing here to avoid any problems. Suffice it to say, the pricing is very reasonable. Basically, Microsoft has taken most prices and calculated a monthly fee based on the equivalent software price divided down over a 3-year period. Since most financial types will depreciate software as capital equipment over a 3-year useful life, you can see that the high level pricing philosophy used here is very reasonable and is not a gouge nor is it a huge discount that is unfair to corporate or enterprises buying retail. Of course, an important distinction is that you pay SPLA for as long as the license is in use, you never own it so you dont stop paying after 3-years. But given the churn and business conditions, along with the fact that software versions change more rapidly than 3-year terms, I dont see this as having any practical financial impact. Microsoft created the SPLA program to make expensive, enterprise class software available legally to hosting companies that are small and entrepreneurial and not just the big telcos. You can get almost ANYTHING on SPLA. BizTalk Server, Content Management Server, Exchange Server, and many other products without investing $50,000 or more in licences if you bought retail or open license. Anyone that thinks this program is bad needs to close their business and flip burgers or something else. Unlike all other licensing options (retail, open corporate license, etc.) there is no volume discount with SPLA. This totally blew me away when I first heard it. Yup, that means the price we pay per month for Windows OS or SQL Server is the same price that Rackspace, EDS, IBM, or ATT pays. So when you see the price list and look at offerings in the market, you can get an idea of what the gross margin must be for someone selling a cheap server for $50 or $75/month with (legal) windows OS included. Unfortunately, within Microsoft, the SPLA program is small compared to many of their other business lines. This means that many Microsoft reps, especially those that sell retail or corporate licenses do not know much about it and often give out conflicting info. If youve ever worked in a big company (and I have worked in HP, Cisco, etc.) you will understand that salespeople in these bigger orgs are completely comp plan driven and only know/push/sell/understand the limited portion of the product line that affects their own paycheck. This is not unusual. There is a dedicated, hardworking, and motivated SPLA group within Microsoft. Visit their website and drill down, or call your regional Microsoft Office and get connected with them. They are the ones that can answer all your questions and clarify any confusion over licensing, costs, and participation. Bottom line do not ask any Microsoft employee about SPLA unless they are directly involved the info you get will be wrong, erroneous, and conflicting at the least. Microsoft has changed the program to allow small companies to qualify as windows hosting without needing the cost and time of having MSCP engineers trained, certified and on staff. You also do not need to be a certified partner you only need to be a registered partner which takes only a few mouse clicks no annual fees.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Microsoft Open License
Unfortunately not. Remember, thats a shared sql server account not a dedicated sql server for $9.95/month. If somebody wants to put 500 sql accounts on a single Celeron server, well, caveat emptor. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John T (Lists) Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 3:41 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Microsoft Open License On the one hand, if it that was upheld as true as you say and enforceable, do you think that would help get rid of all those fly-by-night hosting companies out there offering unlimited this and unlimited that with a SQL backend for $9.95 per month? John T eServices For You Seek, and ye shall find! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 3:07 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Microsoft Open License John, I haven't looked at the SQL Server license, but the Windows 2003 Server Standard Edition license states: Renting, leasing, or lending the Software (including providing commercial hosting services) is also prohibited. It makes no difference as to who's software you are using on top of Windows, just that Windows is the OS. Clearly Microsoft's intention is to have service providers of any sort running Windows buy into the SPLA licensing. I don't however believe that it is enforceable based on the things that I had brought up. Microsoft would likely lose in court at this point if they tried to press the matter, however, in the future, things may be different and it is clear that they are laying the ground work for that. Matt John T (Lists) wrote: That is where the question comes in. I am not hosting a client or providing a client a service on a server. I have listened in on a conversation between a big client of mine and a lawyer and the lawyers thought is that I am providing a package product, in one case a web and e-mail hosting service. However that package includes DNS services, logs and other items depending on service level. That package is facilitated by different software provided by different servers located on various servers. As such, it is that lawyers thought that there is no requirement for a service provider licensing. In his opinion, where the service provider licensing would come into affect, no matter what vendor, is when a server or software or what ever is purchased and/or dedicated and/or designated to a client. This conversation came up when this client of mine was having their website rebuilt which would require a MS SQL server. The question posed was if a client requires say SQL server, and I go out and purchase and install it and then charge them a premium for it, who owns it, me or the client. The outcome was that if SPLA was not in existence, then if I was charging that client a premium for it and never used SQL for anything else, then the client owned it. However, if I bought it and I used it, and then offered the client to use it as part of his website, and he had no control over it and could not connect to it, then I owned it. He said the same with SPLA. If I used SQL and then allowed his website to use it but he could not connect to it to run sp or queries and I advertised a hosting service that included SQL to all at whatever service level, then a SPLA is not used. John T eServices For You Seek, and ye shall find! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 12:34 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Microsoft Open License The popular understanding is exactly the opposite in fact, but even Microsoft's own reps don't always tell it the same way. The fact is that anyone hosting clients is violating the standard EULA on Windows since they made that change, and SPLA is required. Whether or not that is enforceable is an open question. Matt John T (Lists) wrote: Matt, my understanding is that is the server is hosting multiple web sites for multiple clients, and therefore is not dedicated to any one client, the SPLA does not apply. If a server is dedicated for one client, whether that server be for web sites, SQL, ACT, Quickbooks, whatever, then that server must be licensed via SPLA. John T eServices For You Seek, and ye shall find! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 12:05 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Microsoft Open License Shayne (and Kevin), Rant = on I see now that under the SPLA program, they seem to indicate in a very round-about way that you have to use SPLA, in fact, you have to purchase a separate license per processor for anonymous access to IIS over the Internet. What a crock of s#*t that is. This is
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SmarterMail 3 / Declude 4
One limitation in SmarterMail is you can't turn off the built-in webmail commands for mark as spam which is used to build the spam/ham queues for the internal Bayesian filters. Since we aren't using the SmarterMail filters, this is basically a confusing no op option for our users and we would prefer to hide this choice but there is no option to turn it off and the skins customization does not allow this kind of change (at this time the entire skins thing is broken as it has not been upgraded to v3.) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Robertson Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 11:14 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SmarterMail 3 / Declude 4 Declude's integration with SmarterMail's spam system is something we had been waiting on for over a year. Declude passes the final weight back to SM, and SM decides what to do with the message. This means you can set different actions for each user or domain based on whatever weight is best for them. Some admins might take this for granted, but using SM 2.x with Declude always felt like you were patching together content filters to try to trick SM into reading Declude's recommendation. Basically everything built into SM to handle spam now works, including: domain and user level trusted senders; whitelisting from address books and Unmark as Spam; and whitelisting thru SM only applies to the user/domain it was set for (whereas whitelisting thru Declude would whitelist the message for every recipient). In addition, the SM spam setting for message forwarding (i.e. - Do not forward spam level medium and above) actually works. Very useful. In short, the SM 3/Declude 4 combo is an incredible improvement over the previous version. Declude just assigns the weight -- SM handles delivering, modifying or deleting the message. I can't comment on SMTP blocking. We use gateways to filter all incoming mail, so we don't use that feature. I'd be interested to hear whether it actually does use Declude to block at the SMTP level. Hope that helps, Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jay Sudowski - Handy Networks LLC Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 9:51 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] SmarterMail 3 / Declude 4 I'm wondering if anyone is running SmarterMail 3 / Declude 4 and can explain the greater integration that SmarterMail now has with Declude, and how you've been dealing with that so far. Most intriguing is this potential feature from SmarterMail manual: Declude Declude integration allows you to use Declude products in conjunction with the SmarterMail weighting system. Configuration of Declude is done through the Declude product, and all you need to do in SmarterMail is enable the spam check. -- AND -- SMTP Blocking This tab allows you to set up extra spam checks that block emails at delivery if a certain amount of spam checks fail. Enable SMTP Spam Blocking - Check this box to turn on this feature. SMTP Block Threshold - An email must score this value or higher in order to be blocked. The score is established by the settings on the Spam Checks tab. Does this mean that it's now possible to reject messages using Declude at the SMTP session level? Thanks! - Jay Sudowski // Handy Networks LLC Director of Technical Operations Providing Shared, Reseller, Semi Managed and Fully Managed Windows 2003 Hosting Solutions Tel: 877-70 HANDY x882 | Fax: 888-300-2FAX www.handynetworks.com --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
[Declude.JunkMail] SmarterMail 3.0 is out - has anyone tried it yet?
According to SmarterTools site, version 3 is finally out. Im anxious to hear if the port 587 stuff is working right, among all the other new things this one is important catch-up feature with Imail. It also looks like they added subfolder handling to smtp and pop just like Imail.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Decludeproc abend
Title: Message Ah, you mean using a magic marker to write a visual stripe on the edge of the cards, right? Bah, we just NEVER dropped our card decks. Afterall, using columns 72 to 80 for sequence numbers was always for wimps, right? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Doherty Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 7:20 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Decludeproc abend Thanks for the trip down memory lane, Andy. For me it wasa new360(?) in college in 1968. One of the seniors showed me how to run a thin diagonal stripe down the side of the card deck to aid in sorting, should it ever be necessary... ABEND was absolutely in the vocabulary at that time. Both as evening from my German classes and ABnormalENDing, courtesy of IBM. NowI have REALLY dated myself. -d - Original Message - From: Andy Schmidt To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 11:44 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Decludeproc abend Ha - long before Gates started college, therewas a company called International Business Machines. And you had to program sorter/merger machinesto get your punch cards in the proper order for the revolutionarybrand-new /370s - because disk sorting was not yet available, even though at least the operating system was finally a Dos. Instead of a GUI you had a teletype. And Windows were something you put in walls to look through. Yet, programs were abending already. I'm frequently amused about new concepts thatare beingintroduced into desktop/server architecture from time to time - often thinking, been there - done that, butmore than 20 years ago. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax: +1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Hayer Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 04:51 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Decludeproc abend John T (Lists) wrote: Is abend some kind of French word? AbnormalEnding. - circa 1985 - coined with the introduction of Microsoft products. -Nicko ;) John T eServices For You -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Goran Jovanovic Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 1:13 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Decludeproc abend I have had decludeproc 3.0.5.22 abend on me twice today. Is there anything I should be doing to capture information about this? I have automatic restart enabled so it starts again but I am not super happy with it abending. Any hints on what (if anything) I can/should be doing? Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SmarterMail 3.0
The community support for SmarterMail is much smaller (or at least quieter). We are running one SM server for a client and Ive posted several questions on the SM support forums and have not received any responses at all. Similar posts to Imail or Declude discussion lists have always resulted in lots of replies with useful help. Obviously the products are different and the questions are different, but so far Im not impressed with the size/responsiveness of the community. Thats an important factor we will consider seriously before migrating any other servers from Imail to SM saving a few hundred dollars in license costs is insignificant if we cant get help one way or another as quickly. (Needless to say, the SM questions were on issues that SM tech support provided courteous but not helpful replies when first submitted privately as an email support case, so I was hoping for help from the community) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Evans Martin Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 10:48 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SmarterMail 3.0 Its such a breath of fresh air having been in the IMail camp for the last several years. LOL! Evans Martin EVANS MARTIN [EMAIL PROTECTED] HOSTING: http://www.martek.net PROGRAMMING: http://www.martekware.com iPlus Info Browser IPBs IMail Migration Tool, password browser, reporting suite make IPlus Info Browser something no IMail administrator should be without. http://www.martek.net/Default.aspx?tabid=96 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary Steiner Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 6:48 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] SmarterMail 3.0 The following was posted today on SmarterTools web forums: Q: When will we expect to see v. 3? A: The release date depends on the results of final QA. The product is essentially done, just making sure that all the bugs are out of it. Since mail servers are so critical to people's infrastructure, we work extremely hard to make a stable release with no issues that are going to bite you. We don't sacrifice stability for a quick release. Assuming everything is in good order (which to this point it appears to be), release will be middle of January. You can view the original post at http://forums.smartertools.com/forums/2/11125/ShowPost.aspx#11125
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Decludeproc abend
I guess not everyone has had the pleasure of waiting in line for hours for a printout (batch processing mainframes) to find just a few terse lines with ABEND error xx and no other clue as to why the job failed. That's why ABEND sticks in one's mind for many many years if you've had to deal with program crashes from mainframe days -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Goran Jovanovic Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 1:57 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Decludeproc abend And here I thought that everyone knew that termoh well I am dating myself Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 4:49 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Decludeproc abend I always thought it was Absent By Enforced Net Deprivation - usually when someone hadn't posted in a while 'cause their modem died or their parents grounded them. It's been a long time since I heard that though. - greg Abend is a common term used in the world of mainframes. It's the same as aborted or crashed. I first heard it in 1981 and used it many, many times over the years. I don't know where the term originated from. _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Markus Gufler Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 3:30 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Decludeproc abend abend in German means evening. good Abend! :-) Markus _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John T (Lists) Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 10:23 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Decludeproc abend Is abend some kind of French word? ;) John T eServices For You -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Goran Jovanovic Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 1:13 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Decludeproc abend I have had decludeproc 3.0.5.22 abend on me twice today. Is there anything I should be doing to capture information about this? I have automatic restart enabled so it starts again but I am not super happy with it abending. Any hints on what (if anything) I can/should be doing? Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude EVA www.declude.com] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude EVA www.declude.com] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude EVA www.declude.com] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SmarterMail 3.0
A couple of things: How to remove the mark as spam menu items in webmail since they are meaningless when using an external spam blocking preprocessor. The suggestion I got from support that in an unsupported manner I could edit the aspx files, seemed partly reasonable until I poked around and found that everything is codebehind with server controls and only the compiled dlls are distributed. Kinda impossible to modify a server control that way! (I understand why they wont publish source code, but they sent me down a false alley) Other issue is more wrappers around the webservice interface to make it more usable for non SOAP experts. I would like to have a commandline utility and some asp/aspx pages that provide a forms interface for adding domains, users, etc. Just some published code and some good examples would help. There is very little officially available and some of the stuff published in the forums doesnt work completely. Last issue was how to use dynamic content in the skins. We would like to change the logo based on the URL so we have have per-domain skins without creating hundreds of virtual sites and duplicating the webserver files to accomplish that by brute force. The whole skin thing is not well documented for changing anything non-trivial. The skin templates are *.htm files which somehow get pre-processed into aspx files but one cannot touch those aspx files easily. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Panda Consulting S.A. Luis Alberto Arango Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 6:06 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SmarterMail 3.0 what questions do you have regarding smartermail? or what is your username in the forum to look for them. I try to be actively involved in the forum -that is my way to learn about smartermail- and I will be glad to try to help. regards -Luis Arango From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Graveen Sent: Miércoles, 21 de Diciembre de 2005 08:51 a.m. To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SmarterMail 3.0 I've also posted question to their forum with little or no response (I didn't think the questions were that obscure). There definitely seems to be more experts in the IMail camp, or at least experts that are willing to share. As with new versions of IMail, I'll take the wait and see attitude with Smartermail 3.0 MIchael Graveen At 03:42 AM 12/21/2005, you wrote: The community support for SmarterMail is much smaller (or at least quieter). We are running one SM server for a client and Ive posted several questions on the SM support forums and have not received any responses at all. Similar posts to Imail or Declude discussion lists have always resulted in lots of replies with useful help. Obviously the products are different and the questions are different, but so far Im not impressed with the size/responsiveness of the community. Thats an important factor we will consider seriously before migrating any other servers from Imail to SM saving a few hundred dollars in license costs is insignificant if we cant get help one way or another as quickly. (Needless to say, the SM questions were on issues that SM tech support provided courteous but not helpful replies when first submitted privately as an email support case, so I was hoping for help from the community) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Evans Martin Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 10:48 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SmarterMail 3.0 Its such a breath of fresh air having been in the IMail camp for the last several years. LOL! Evans Martin EVANS MARTIN [EMAIL PROTECTED] HOSTING: http://www.martek.net PROGRAMMING: http://www.martekware.com iPlus Info Browser IPBs IMail Migration Tool, password browser, reporting suite make IPlus Info Browser something no IMail administrator should be without. http://www.martek.net/Default.aspx?tabid=96 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Gary Steiner Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 6:48 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] SmarterMail 3.0 The following was posted today on SmarterTools web forums: Q: When will we expect to see v. 3? A: The release date depends on the results of final QA. The product is essentially done, just making sure that all the bugs are out of it. Since mail servers are so critical to people's infrastructure, we work extremely hard to make a stable release with no issues that are going to bite you. We don't sacrifice stability for a quick release. Assuming everything is in good order (which to this point it appears to be), release will be middle of January. You can view the original post at http://forums.smartertools.com/forums/2/11125/ShowPost.aspx#11125
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude Technical Support Tickets
ROTFL A real-world example of the disconnect between the technologists building all these tools and the reality of how much work sysadmins and the real users have to go thru to deal with the limitations of current anti-spam solutions. And I assume, this is after the best tweaks and config file optimization possible for Declude, right? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Franco-Rocha [ Declude ] Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 6:30 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Cc: Declude.Virus@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude Technical Support Tickets Please note that we receive a large amount of spam at our technical support email address for the ticket system. When I look through the tickets, I delete whatever looks like spam, as well as all tickets that do not contain a subject. Fortunately I keep backup copies of all incoming tech support email. I discovered a backup copy this morning of a legitimate ticket that I had deleted because it lacked a subject: completely blank. Please always provide a subject when you send email to technical support because it allows us to see at a glance whether we have several instances of an issue and also to prioritize the tickets. We have to delete emails that do not contain a subject because it takes too much time to open every email without a subject merely to determine whether it is valid or not. To facilitate processing of trouble tickets, please do not generate multiple tickets for the same issue. Simply reply to our email, which will contain the ticket number as part of the subject line. If we resolve an issue and close a ticket and the issue creeps up again, you can always reply to the last reply you received from us on that ticket. This will automatically re-open the same ticket and we will have acess to all information previously provided by you. Thanks for your cooperation and assistance. David Franco-Rocha Declude Technical / Engineering --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
[Declude.JunkMail] OT: SmarterMail auto-create users
Hi, I have a question for those of you that are using SmarterMail. We are looking at the software to determine how we can link it to our user creation process. Currently, we have both classic asp (ASP not ASP.NET) and php scripts that create users by POSTing to a form. The back-end of the form hander spawns a commandline to actually create the user. SmarterMail has a web services programmatic interface, but we'd prefer not to write completely new software in ASP.NET Does anyone have a wrapper or some other method that will allow us to continue to use our existing ASP and PHP scripts by (hopefully) only changing the back-end form handler? --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SmarterMail shortcomings in a gateway environment
Thank you for the detailed analysis - We have been considering SmarterMail as a migration path from IMail but will probably go slow until they grow up a bit more. How about open source? I seem to recall there are a few open source mail servers based on decent code (ASP.NET) that run on Windows servers. It's starting to look like no solution will be malleable unless as a last resort the code is available to do quick fixes like this that the vendor/providers just don't seem able to comprehend or have any interest in fixing. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 3:50 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] SmarterMail shortcomings in a gateway environment Why does this always happen to me... I was looking to leave my IMail/Declude setup as my gateway spam blocking component, and move hosted E-mail to a different server. All I needed in the hosted mail server was something that could be configured in such a way as to only accept SMTP AUTH E-mail or E-mail that only came from my own gateway. I figured that SmarterMail with port 587 support (the SMTP submission port) would do the trick. Well, it turns out that despite earlier claims, SmarterMail supports another SMTP port of your choosing, but it doesn't limit it to SMTP AUTH-only. This means that the spammers that have a habit of bypassing your MX records for indefinite periods of time will be able to still hit the SmarterMail server and bypass the scanning gateways. I found a post from two days ago that pointed out this major shortcoming, and despite an earlier thread on the topic, it turns out that this is a real limitation. I started searching for alternative methods around this, such as setting up a custom zone that blacklists the whole Internet except for the IP space of my scanning servers and using their internal spam blocking to delete anything that didn't come from my own space or was AUTHed. I ran into another problem here however...their blacklist capabilities don't allow for unique result codes, so anything that returns a result from a blacklist is treated as a positive hit. I had to actually create a CNAME record for a bogus domain to correspond to this space in order to work around that limitation and it worked. I then however figured out that they do not whitelist based on SMTP AUTH, but instead, they whitelist anything with a local address, and if a user doesn't have a local address in their headers but still AUTH's, it won't be whitelisted. So due to this shortsighted implementation on multiple fronts, there is no practical way to accomplish this and have it be reliable. I also came across another thread while researching things where some fellow Declude users were pointing out how their gateway configuration affected blacklists. We all know here that when gatewaying through a different server, you need something that is the equivalent of IPBYPASS for the gateway. They overlooked this, and after it was pointed out to them they suggested that they instead test all hops, which would have resulted in tagging many messages that are sent from clients on DUL IP space. I'm not sure that by the end of the thread that the concept stuck with them. It is a very pretty application, but it has a lot of settings within it and a few of them don't seem very well thought out. I E-mailed their tech support asking for ways around this or an indication of plans to support AUTH-only on the SMTP submission port and they ducked the questions saying that it wasn't possible to do at this time and directed my ticket to their sales staff so that I could get a refund. Unfortunately they seem to need to create a functional whitelisting mechanism for AUTHed users also for this to work instead of one based on the Mail From address. I'm a little put off by the short answers in response to such things, and the rubber stamped reply that it will be added to their suggestion database. Maybe I'm expecting too much... At this point, I'm looking for alternatives...including using IMail on the new server (I can do this with 8.20).I am also hopeful that maybe some of the others around here have run into this issue and possibly have some alternative suggestions. While I don't want to support IMail any longer and feel that they might again pull the rug out from under me, I can migrate things in a snap and I won't have to worry about taking a risk with SmarterMail. Matt -- = MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro. http://www.mailpure.com/software/ = --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Admin Web for Declude
It's called Postini Message Center :-) Seriously, the lack of user self-service for adjusting settings and the lack of more automatic set-it and forget it system level options (along with wanting to be completely freed from Imail or any replacement MTA engine) has finally shifted the balance for us and we just completed migrating from Imail/Declude to Postini as our anti-virus and spam blocking system. Declude (especially Scott) has been great over the past few years, but I guess just as Scott outgrew running a one-man show, we have finally outgrown Declude. Obviously, everyone's experiences and needs are different, but I've grown tired of the repeated cycle of spam or virus outbreak, complaints from clients about too much stuff getting through, hours of tweaking/testing, then complaints from clients about important stuff being blocked. The control panel for dummies approach of Postini now lets us defer the tweaks back to the user. Too much spam getting through? Well, sir, please log in to your Message Center (Postini lingo for web control panel) and crank up your settings. Important email not getting through? Just log in and with an easy-to-use Web GUI adjust your allowed or disallowed lists. The downside? Postini has a cost-per-mailbox monthly service fee rather than an annual software license fee. However, for us, when took off my techie hat and put on my businessman's one, I looked at the 35,000 foot view and how we can had been scaling out with multiple mail servers to handle the incoming load; starting to deploy yet additional front-end servers to offload anti-virus scanning and spam filtering so the performance doesn't impact the pop/imap Imail engine; and all the license agreements/maintenance fees I realized we could immediately retire several servers along with the Declude and Imail annual licenses/maintenance agreements. Not to mention my own time, which I value highly, of many hours a week tweaking rules and adjusting the server functions or manually clearing thousands of spam or virus spool files on the server that got through in the early stages of a new attack. For us, because we do charge our clients a per-mailbox fee for spam blocking anyway, the pricing of Postini was not the big gulp it might be for some of you offering everything for free to your clients. Besides the lack of end-user gui and simplified rules tweaks (essentially now we let Postini adjust all the rules on their end based on their processing of over 6 billion emails a month from all their clients - they certainly get to see what is out there), the straw that broke the camel's back for us was the Rube Goldberg scripting we were starting to implement using Sandy's wonderfull stuff because as soon as one deploy's IMail in store and forward mode (to get the distributed scale-out, offloading, etc.) then you are exposed to dictionary attacks, nobody catch-all floods, etc. Sandy's scripts are great, but we stepped back and said do we really want all this complexity and spend so much of our operational focus just on keeping the mail flowing while relying on a few vb scripts to keep everything running? A great upside to Postini is that we automatically get multiple MX front-end redundancy and emergency spooling (optional add-on service) that will hold our mail should our servers be down briefly. With the simplified hub-and-spoke scaleout (multiple email servers being fed by Postini's own redundant clusters) our configuration is much simpler yet still distributed and expandable while some of our licensing fees are actually greatly reduced. Please understand this is not meant as a complaint or rant - I'd like to thank the Declude community and company for their great product and support over the past few years but we've had to move on. And the best part? Our customer service complaints about spam or email problems have gone down to almost zero - our clients like us again! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Kratka Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 2:06 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Admin Web for Declude Hello, Quite some time ago, there was mention about an Admin Web for Declude, is this available or does anyone have something to share? Thank You. Jeff Kratka TymeWyse Internet P.O.Box 84 - 110 Ecklund St., Canyonville, OR 97417 tel: (541) 839-6027 - [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
[Declude.JunkMail] SmarterMail - what we need to convert from IMail
I haven't seen anyone else bring this up... We are looking for a new mail server to dump Imail. I think everyone knows the reasons, so I won't rehash history. Our customer base is very horizontal and ranges from clueless newbies to advanced developers. Because we have many users that took a while to learn (yes, believe it or not) how to use WebMail we are not anxious to change. So for us, (and I bet a few others) the single most important feature would be a skin for the SmarterMail web interface that make it look and feel exactly like the classic yellow IMail templates that we still use. I know this may seem lame technically, but we don't want to support two different webmail systems and we don't want to move to something only for new clients; we want a system we can migrate all our current clients so that after a period of time both our clients ourselves are only dealing with one product. In the past, we've looked at using an open-source of other Webmail only interface. Our thinking was that if we moved our clients to a separate Webmail GUI (and suffered through the consequences) then we could change the MTA underneath at our own will without client impact. Unfortunately, the strength of Imail Webmail is the integrated host admin features that let a domain owner create/delete/modify the users/passwords in their domain. All 3rd party open-source products do not have any built-in user management because that is always MTA-specific. Has anyone else though about a solution other than skins or emulation? --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
