>> Got it, do people find it's better to make imapd accept client >> connections on the standard 143 or for imapproxy to do so? Or maybe >> there is no preference? > > Imapproxy is meant for IMAP clients which are unable to maintain > persistent IMAP connections, such as webmail software which sends > login and logout events on every single click in the web browser. > (Not full-blown IMAP clints like Mozilla Thunderbird or alpine) > > As such imapproxy is never exposed to the network or end users and > only ever used by your webmail software, usually by binding only to > the loopback network interface on your server (not reachable directly > from the outside world, but reachable from processses on the local > machine). > > As such which port to use for imapproxy is really immaterial (noone > but the admin will ever see the difference), with the usual exception > that processes binding to TCP ports < 1024 will need to be run as root > (uid=0) or use methods to drop privileges after opening the socket > (authbind, tcpd, etc.). > > Hope this helps to clear up a few things, > -peter
Thank you again Peter. Shouldn't the default imapproxy config specify different ports for listen_port and server_port since they can't be the same? My config file had both set to 143. Is that a Gentoo bug? - Grant ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb ----- squirrelmail-imapproxy mailing list Posting guidelines: http://squirrelmail.org/postingguidelines List address: squirrelmail-imapproxy@lists.sourceforge.net List archives: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.mail.squirrelmail.imapproxy List info (subscribe/unsubscribe/change options): https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/squirrelmail-imapproxy
