Re: redundant mail servers

2001-03-31 Thread Raul Miller
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 11:02:13AM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote: Why would you ever have that much email in your incoming mailbox? Why are you leaving it there? Some people get 500-1000 message per day. Yeah, you can sort it into different mail boxes, but you're not going to get to the low

Re: redundant mail servers

2001-03-26 Thread Markus Stumpf
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 11:02:13AM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote: You use POP3 when you want to get the email the hell off your servers. Anyone else noticing a heavy growth in "Keep eMails on Server" settings in POP3 ? :((( You use IMAP when you want to have a mail expiration policy,

Re: redundant mail servers

2001-03-24 Thread Russell Nelson
Vincent Schonau writes: On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 11:01:51AM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote: Gopi Sundaram writes: I'm reluctant to move to Maildir until we can get more MUAs to support them (specifically Pine and Netscape). Wrong idea. Never expose your mailboxes to your users.

Re: redundant mail servers

2001-03-23 Thread Russell Nelson
Gopi Sundaram writes: http://www.imap.org/papers/imap.vs.pop.brief.html You use POP3 when you want to get the email the hell off your servers. You use IMAP when you want to have a mail expiration policy, when you want to backup your users email, when your users read their email sometimes

Re: redundant mail servers

2001-03-23 Thread Vincent Schonau
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 11:01:51AM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote: Gopi Sundaram writes: I'm reluctant to move to Maildir until we can get more MUAs to support them (specifically Pine and Netscape). Wrong idea. Never expose your mailboxes to your users. Always use a virtual mailbox system

Re: redundant mail servers

2001-03-23 Thread Mark Delany
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 08:09:01PM +0100, Vincent Schonau wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 11:01:51AM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote: Gopi Sundaram writes: I'm reluctant to move to Maildir until we can get more MUAs to support them (specifically Pine and Netscape). Wrong idea. Never

redundant mail servers

2001-03-21 Thread Gopi Sundaram
Hello all, We are currently running sendmail at our site, and are trying to move to qmail. Since we are making the move, I thought we should also add some redundancy, so here is my idea: There will be 2 mail servers, mail1 and mail2 Any email that is received by mail1 should automatically be

Re: redundant mail servers

2001-03-21 Thread Mark Delany
There will be 2 mail servers, mail1 and mail2 Any email that is received by mail1 should automatically be forwarded to mail2, and any email that is received by mail2 should be forwarded to mail1. The only exception to the rule is when they receive messages from each other. Thus a user

Re: redundant mail servers

2001-03-21 Thread J.J. Gallardo
Gopi Sundaram escribi: There will be 2 mail servers, mail1 and mail2 Thus a user can check their email via IMAP or (shudder) POP from either mail1 or mail2. How? Your users must configure only "ONE ACCOUNT" on his cliente browser. Or "user1%mail1" either "user1%mail2". How you do it this?

Re: redundant mail servers

2001-03-21 Thread Gopi Sundaram
On 21 Mar 2001, Mark Delany wrote (quoting me): Thus a user can check their email via IMAP or (shudder) POP from Why shudder? POP is by far the most reliable service of the two and much simpler and supported by more clients. http://www.imap.org/papers/imap.vs.pop.brief.html This is not a

Re: redundant mail servers

2001-03-21 Thread Mark Delany
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 10:58:06AM -0500, Gopi Sundaram wrote: On 21 Mar 2001, Mark Delany wrote (quoting me): Thus a user can check their email via IMAP or (shudder) POP from Why shudder? POP is by far the most reliable service of the two and much simpler and supported by more

Re: redundant mail servers

2001-03-21 Thread Gopi Sundaram
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote (quoting me): http://www.imap.org/papers/imap.vs.pop.brief.html And what is your *own* opinion? I prefer POP because IMAP makes users leave mail on server, amongst others. That is one of the reasons why I prefer IMAP. I don't like leaving my email

Re: redundant mail servers

2001-03-21 Thread Mark Delany
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 12:41:27PM -0500, Gopi Sundaram wrote: On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote (quoting me): http://www.imap.org/papers/imap.vs.pop.brief.html And what is your *own* opinion? I prefer POP because IMAP makes users leave mail on server, amongst others. That

Re: redundant mail servers

2001-03-21 Thread Gopi Sundaram
On 21 Mar 2001, Mark Delany wrote (quoting me): Ideally, I would like mail to still be delivered to /var/mail/ in Why do you want it in /var/mail particularly, apart from the fact that you're used to it being there? I would like all email to be received to approximately the same place. Can

Re: redundant mail servers

2001-03-21 Thread Peter van Dijk
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 02:46:23PM -0500, Gopi Sundaram wrote: On 21 Mar 2001, Mark Delany wrote (quoting me): Ideally, I would like mail to still be delivered to /var/mail/ in Why do you want it in /var/mail particularly, apart from the fact that you're used to it being there? I