On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 08:59:38AM -0400, Frank Muto wrote:
> That still puts pressure on the system resources. As a wireless
> provider you have enough on your plate to deal with. Options
> include, outsourcing email with integrated spam/virus (AS/AV) with
> IMAP/POP3/Webmail options, or outsource the AS/AV and take the load
> off of your systems.

I outsource my spam scanning.  I will *not* outsource my e-mail hosting.  

I outsourced anti-spam/anti-virus onto a barracuda model 400 because it
was the model which would :

  A) Save me 20 hours per week of analyzing and creating rules for my
     SpamAssassin boxes.

  B) Still let me follow every message, every step of the way through
     the systems.

  C) Only need one BSF 400 to handle the load that required 2
     SpamAssassin boxes.

  D) Allow me to rebrand the interface.

  E) Provide a web GUI for users to tweak their individual settings to a
     level which worked for them, with a quarantine holding area other
     than their inbox for the borderline stuff.  False positives suck
     less if you can pull them out of the quarantine.

Things like Postini provide some of the same benefits.  But I really,
really worry about B.  I could buy a new BSF model 600 every two years
for the prices I was quoted by the Postini sales guy (not you).

A year or two later, I bought a second model 400 to help deal with the
scanning load.  Spam volume had more than doubled.  Currently, we see
more than 700,000 message send attempts to the two boxes per day.  The
RBLs take out approximately 600,000 of those attempts.

> Your current mail system is there for backup should you ever need
> it, if you outsource email. We have some clients that split between
> the two by e.g., keeping their appliance, in this case Barracuda and
> outsourcing additional AS/AV and email.  Barracuda needs to upgrade
> their 300/400 units with Gigabit Ethernet, IMO. Instead of selling
> higher priced models or additional units to cover the amount of load
> even for the under 500 user systems.

I'm curious why you think the model 300/400 barracudas are desperately
in need of gigabit ethernet.  In my experience with e-mail
handling, the network interface has never been the bottleneck.  An
anti-spam/anti-virus box needs lots of RAM, CPU and HD IO bandwidth.

I wouldn't want to have to do much more non-RBL based scanning of mail
with my two model 400s but that's not due to their choice of NIC.

While I do have a few reservations about Barracuda Networks, it seems
really weird to be slamming them for only having 100Mbps ethernet on
their low end models.  The CPU and RAM in the BSF model 400 and below
could never deal with a full 100Mbps of traffic.  E-mail traffic is less
than 4% of our total network traffic.

I would like to try a MailFoundry box because they seem to compare
favorably to the BSFs at a slightly lower cost.  But, users *hate*
change and if the MailFoundry didn't work, there would be two changes.
Users switch to other providers at the slightest hint that there might
be a change coming.  Users are strange.  Also, I don't have enough
issues with the BSFs to be that interested in spending time converting
to another system.
 
-- 
Scott Lambert                    KC5MLE                       Unix SysAdmin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to