Re: Questions,fixes,problems: Cyrus 2.0.9, NetBSD 1.5 [LONG]

2001-01-05 Thread Joe Turner

EXCUSE me for my bad enlgish
Take me off this god damn mail list..or someone indicate WHO I can email 
regarding this emailing list.

Is there no STANDARD UNSUBSCRIBE option?

Joe

On 5 Jan 2001, Amos Gouaux wrote:

  On Thu, 4 Jan 2001 22:56:48 +,
  Cillian Sharkey [EMAIL PROTECTED] (cs) writes:
 
 cs Hi folks,
 cs [Apologies for length of email]
 
 [Not being too familiar with NetBSD, there isn't much here I can
 comment on, but...]
 
 cs - libwrap wasn't detected, even though it exists and works!
 cs   /usr/lib/libwrap.a, /usr/lib/libwrap.so* and /usr/include/tcpd.h are there 
 cs   ok. passing --with-libwrap=/usr doesn't work either.
 
 I believe this has been fixed for the forthcoming 2.0.10.
 
 cs - What do people recommend for "distribution lists" in an IMAP environment:
 
 I believe this has come up from time to time in the past, so you
 might check the archives.  I don't think there is really a magic
 bullet approach, at least not for all.
 
 cs   - Use a shared folder with an email alias for posting to it and then use
 cs ACLs to grant/deny people access the folder? Unfortunately, the Netscape
 cs MUA only checks "Inbox" for new mail so it's easy to miss new mail in
 cs other folders..
 
 We've experimented with this, and still use it in some cases.  The
 problem, as you noted, is the notification of new mail.  Few clients
 really handle this well, and so this approach has proven to be less
 popular, especially with those that have never used USENET, or those
 that feel their posts are sufficiently important that they must be
 "direct delivered".  (Though, I'll concede that there are times this
 is actually necessary.)
 
 cs   OR
   
 cs   - Use dedicated mailing list software [like mailman with a web interface
 cs for admin tasks] In this case mail would be delivered to Inbox. There is
 cs also the concept of having "list owners", although this could be achieved
 cs by giving someone the "a" right on the shared folder discussed above.
 
 And we do this as well.  Actually, we've also experimented with a
 rather perverse melding of both, with mixed success.  For various
 reasons, we're using Listar.  One convenient thing about Listar is
 that the users file is plain text, which makes it very easy to
 scan.  So with many of the high-volume/large member lists, we've
 created a shared IMAP folder to archive the list, much like what CMU
 does with info-cyrus.  If you're merely a member of the list, you
 get read-only access.  If you're a list moderator, you get
 read/write access.
 
 So, if someone wants to just rely on the shared folder to keep up
 with the mayhem, all they have to do is set their list configuration
 to be in 'vacation' mode.  That way they won't get the list traffic
 in their inbox, but still retain access to the shared folder.  I
 told you it was perverse.
 
 One convenient thing about this approach is that if they neglect to
 manage their inbox and run over quota, they are automatically put
 into vacation mode.  Fortunately Listar does this for us without any
 extra effort.
 
 cs - Finally, any good IMAP MUAs for Windows? Netscape 4.7x is a bit braindead
 cs   in many ways. I know there is Mulberry and I think Pegasus does IMAP too, but
 cs   the advantage over them with Netscape is:
 
 That topic is too opinionated for me to feel included to jump in,
 especially at this hour.
 
 cs   - The netscape UI is quite nice
 cs   - Our users are used to this (i.e. just click on the little "mail" icon!)
 cs   - Our current setup has netscape 'auto-configuration' so users never have to
 cs setup their a/c. And they can't screw up the config either as it's "fixed"
 cs on next login. In other words, "it just works" (TM) which is very handy
 cs for us admins.
 
 If it works, use it.  Personally, I'd like to see Netscape 7 support
 ACAP.  Oh, I wasn't going to do that.
 
 -- 
 Amos
 






Re: Questions,fixes,problems: Cyrus 2.0.9, NetBSD 1.5 [LONG]

2001-01-05 Thread Ken Murchison



Cillian Sharkey wrote:
 
 - Do you recommend poll or idled for the "IDLE" method? How do these benefit
   the server/client if they make use of them?

First off, this only matters if your users are using a client which
supports IDLE.  The only mainstream client that I know of that supports
IDLE is Outlook.

The IDLE command allows the client to receive mailbox updates without
having to poll the server (ie, reduced traffic, etc).

The 'poll' method simply polls the selected mailbox as the client
would.  This essentially simulates the client polling without the client
having to send the NOOP command.  This might be a good option if you
only have a handful of IDLE clients.

The 'idled' method uses a separate daemon which receives 'mailbox
update' messages from lmtpd/imapd/pop3d and then signals IDLEing imapds
that the mailbox has changed.  On a system with a lot of IDLE clients,
this is a win because it eliminates unnecessary polling of the mailbox. 
The mailbox is only checked when it has been changed.  It also allows
for 'real-time' updates, where the poll method only sends updates every
'imapidlepoll' seconds.

Ken
-- 
Kenneth Murchison Oceana Matrix Ltd.
Software Engineer 21 Princeton Place
716-662-8973 x26  Orchard Park, NY 14127
--PGP Public Key--http://www.oceana.com/~ken/ksm.pgp