Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: avoiding overload on port 587

Expand Messages
  • Jose-Marcio Martins da Cruz
    ... More and more people are roaming users. Roaming users shall have their mail in the server : so IMAP is the choice. Some use webmail, and some use heavy
    Message 1 of 54 , Dec 1, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Stan Hoeppner wrote:
      > On 11/30/2012 4:48 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
      >
      >> in the real world submission is useless if IMAP is down
      >> because the client will fail to store in "sent messages"
      >
      > In the real world most road warriors use POP, not IMAP, and those with
      > consistent connectivity that do make use of IMAP do it via web mail. So
      > the "sent items" folder isn't an issue. Note the OP mentioned "laptop
      > users" as his submitters, not desktop users. "Laptop" implies roaming,
      > or he'd have used a different descriptive term.

      More and more people are roaming users. Roaming users shall have their mail in
      the server : so IMAP is the choice. Some use webmail, and some use heavy clients
      (Thunderbird, Outlook, ...), the latter are people who need to work both online
      and offline.

      Yes... storing messages in "sent messages" folder may be an issue, not only when
      the IMAP server is down, but also when it's overloaded.

      >
      >> PHYSICAL boxes are not needed in 900 out of 1000 environments
      >
      > Reindl, nobody here has ever heard of virtualization, so it's good that
      > you give us all a lesson with every 3rd post. ;)
      >

      Hmmmm... tell this to vmware/zimbra guys... 8-)

      Just my two cents...

      --
    • /dev/rob0
      ... Or better yet: replace it with postscreen. ... To clarify, I meant that if those Outlook Expresses are not yet compromised by malware, they will be, soon.
      Message 54 of 54 , Dec 4, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 07:46:10AM -0600, /dev/rob0 wrote:
        > On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 11:59:01PM +1300, Peter wrote:
        > > I would still also set up port 587 on the mail.example.com
        > > IP as submission as well and try to encourage your users (at
        > > least the ones you can) to use port 587 from now on.
        >
        > What I would do, on Linux with IPv4 only, is create the submission
        > port and use an iptables redirect for the alternate IP address:
        >
        > # iptables -vt nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp --dport smtp -d \
        > mail.example.com -j REDIRECT --to-port submission
        >
        > This saves the overhead (system and administrative) of running
        > another smtpd on [mail.example.com]:25; he can leave his "smtp ...
        > smtpd" service alone in master.cf.

        Or better yet: replace it with postscreen.

        > I should also add as a reply to Stan in the other subthread: look
        > above at the first quoted paragraph: "Outlook Expresses setup with
        > ... default configuration."
        >
        > Yikes, bad news, very bad. If not doing content filtering nor
        > policy limitation of submission now, he will be soon. And possibly
        > losing his job in any case. Tomas is not in a good place right now.

        To clarify, I meant that if those Outlook Expresses are not yet
        compromised by malware, they will be, soon.
        --
        http://rob0.nodns4.us/ -- system administration and consulting
        Offlist GMX mail is seen only if "/dev/rob0" is in the Subject:
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.