Tim Nelson wrote:

----- "Robert Moskowitz" rgm@htt-consult.com wrote:

...

I really need to either upgrade my Scalix server or replace it.

It has to be:

Free Integrated with anti-spam IPv6 support optional anti-virus (processing concerns)

I don't have to be able to port mail from the Scalix to the new server. Everyone can just POP their mail.

I have read a bit about Zimbra, it comes as a tar for rhel 5. No rpm that I can find.

I also found SME, I have a LOT of questions about it, and am asking on

their forum board.

Anything else out there I should look for?

Zimbra is fantastic and is easily installed on CentOS 5 by using the provided RHEL5 RPMs.

Where are these rpms? I could only find a tar file.

Where are these rpms? I could only find a tar file.

Untar the file, a new directory will be created with the RPMS.

Zimbra comes as a bundle with its own ldap server, mysql server, clamav, etc. it is difficult or impossible to "update" one of those services , you have to wait for the next zimbra release and look what has been updated.

Also it uses java for some processes, you need a good server (ram,cpu ) in order to run with a good response time.

Best.

on 3-17-2009 12:44 PM Per Qvindesland spake the following:

If your not to picky on calendar sharing and the other sharing options I can really recommend Qmailtoaster http://qmailtoaster.com/, rock solid piece of mail server with a really good web admin interface and a second to none support.

Regards Per Qvindesland

On 3/17/09 8:24 PM, "Robert Moskowitz" rgm-tZ9RT1K724GHT8/ATrE1yw@public.gmane.org wrote:

...

IPv6 support

But it isn't really a Scalix replacement. It is more of an e-mail hub with squirrelmail.

No as I said it does not have all the synchronizing stuff but rock solid email server, sadly Zimbra in my humble opinion not really free, but of course there is http://www.opengroupware.org/ http://www.citadel.org/ http://www.open-xchange.com/EN/developer/index.html and http://kolab.org to mention a few all with their own pro's and con's

Regards Per Qvindesland

On 3/17/09 8:56 PM, "Scott Silva" ssilva@sgvwater.com wrote:

MailScanner is like deodorant...

Rainer Duffner wrote:

All the "free" solutions depend on you spending an extra-ordinary amount of time configuring them.

Well, except SME server where you just add users in a web interface. But as mentioned, it's Centos4 based unless you use the beta version and it doesn't do network authentication out of the box so it's hard to use more than one. On the other hand it will install on a single disk in a way that you can easily add software mirroring later, something difficult to do with stock Centos if it is possible at all.

Rainer Duffner wrote:

Am 17.03.2009 um 21:19 schrieb Per Qvindesland:

...

No as I said it does not have all the synchronizing stuff but rock solid email server, sadly Zimbra in my humble opinion not really free, but of course there is http://www.opengroupware.org/ http://www.citadel.org/ http://www.open-xchange.com/EN/developer/index.html and http://kolab.org to mention a few all with their own pro's and con's

All the "free" solutions depend on you spending an extra-ordinary amount of time configuring them.

The amount of QA needed to pull something like Zimbra off is staggering (sometimes it's still not enough QA....)

My own mail is qmail-only - I gave-up trying to get all the calendaring-packages running long ago. But at work, we have Zimbra and is is really cool IMO. It has a slick web-interface, it sync's with Outlook, Mac - and then there is this great/horrible fat client called Zimbra Desktop... ;-)

I have to admit, though, that the list-price for a small amount of mailboxes looks not so cheap (esp. if you want Zimbra Mobile). (How many mailboxes does the original author want to replace, actually?)

I was running the mailserver for a local organization and that was 30+ users on top of my 10+. They have gone to another site, so I am back to 10+. For now...

But still, I'm kind of fascinated by it - mostly, because it's very openly developed and by browsing through their bugzilla and P4 repository-webinterface, you get a good idea of what current issues there are, what would get fixed by going to a newer version (and which new bugs to expect). I wish every vendor did that.

We run it on CentOS, BTW (test/dev environment via Virtuozzo, production on physical hardware).

Rainer _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Alessandro Ren wrote:

 Qmail is fantastic, have sued for years, but for workgroup, 

calendaring feaures, Zimbra is the way.

I have decided to give SME a go. It provides Qmail on Centos 4.7, with Centos 5.2 in beta.

I chose SME because I also have to replace an NT server here as well, so it makes a good fit.

I have a test system working and building the mailserver replacement system now. Then I will build the NT server replacement.

    []s.

On 3/17/2009 7:30 PM, Rainer Duffner wrote:

...

Am 17.03.2009 um 21:19 schrieb Per Qvindesland:

...

No as I said it does not have all the synchronizing stuff but rock solid email server, sadly Zimbra in my humble opinion not really free, but of course there is http://www.opengroupware.org/ http://www.citadel.org/ http://www.open-xchange.com/EN/developer/index.html and http://kolab.org to mention a few all with their own pro's and con's

All the "free" solutions depend on you spending an extra-ordinary amount of time configuring them.

The amount of QA needed to pull something like Zimbra off is staggering (sometimes it's still not enough QA....)

My own mail is qmail-only - I gave-up trying to get all the calendaring-packages running long ago. But at work, we have Zimbra and is is really cool IMO. It has a slick web-interface, it sync's with Outlook, Mac - and then there is this great/horrible fat client called Zimbra Desktop... ;-)

I have to admit, though, that the list-price for a small amount of mailboxes looks not so cheap (esp. if you want Zimbra Mobile). (How many mailboxes does the original author want to replace, actually?)

But still, I'm kind of fascinated by it - mostly, because it's very openly developed and by browsing through their bugzilla and P4 repository-webinterface, you get a good idea of what current issues there are, what would get fixed by going to a newer version (and which new bugs to expect). I wish every vendor did that.

We run it on CentOS, BTW (test/dev environment via Virtuozzo, production on physical hardware).

Rainer _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

---

CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Care India wrote:

How to stop recieving mail from CentOS forum ?

If you mean this mailing list: By unsubscribing.

Ralph

Les Mikesell wrote:

Robert Moskowitz wrote:

...

...

 Qmail is fantastic, have sued for years, but for workgroup, 

calendaring feaures, Zimbra is the way.

I have decided to give SME a go. It provides Qmail on Centos 4.7, with Centos 5.2 in beta.

I chose SME because I also have to replace an NT server here as well, so it makes a good fit.

I have a test system working and building the mailserver replacement system now. Then I will build the NT server replacement.

Depending on the number of users, a single machine might easily serve both roles (and your internet gateway/firewall too, if you need one).

Not many users, but there are security/privacy issues for the separation.

Also I would NEVER consider running SMB services on a gateway/firewall and I need IPv6 support anyway on the gateway/firewall. So far I have used Astaro with roll-your-own (Astaro predates the IPv6 /48 allocation), and I am getting a 'nice' box from a vendor I work with...

Les Mikesell wrote:

Robert Moskowitz wrote:

...

Les Mikesell wrote:

...

Robert Moskowitz wrote:

...

...

 Qmail is fantastic, have sued for years, but for workgroup, 

calendaring feaures, Zimbra is the way.

I have decided to give SME a go. It provides Qmail on Centos 4.7, with Centos 5.2 in beta.

I chose SME because I also have to replace an NT server here as well, so it makes a good fit.

I have a test system working and building the mailserver replacement system now. Then I will build the NT server replacement.

Depending on the number of users, a single machine might easily serve both roles (and your internet gateway/firewall too, if you need one).

Not many users, but there are security/privacy issues for the separation.

Also I would NEVER consider running SMB services on a gateway/firewall and I need IPv6 support anyway on the gateway/firewall. So far I have used Astaro with roll-your-own (Astaro predates the IPv6 /48 allocation), and I am getting a 'nice' box from a vendor I work with...

Agreed that separation is theoretically safer, but the scripted configuration on SME takes care of most of the things you would be likely to forget if you did it by hand (setting up iptables firewalling, hosts.allow, binding services only to the appropriate interface, adding ip range restrictions within the app configs, etc.).

My concern is not 'out of the box', and even there I have problems with their 1st update procedure. I have problems with the time lag between security bugs and updates applied.

Gateway/firewalls have to be very conservative on services offered. There are ways to virtualize this, but SME has not done that.

The down side of two machines is that stock SME doesn't use LDAP network authentication and it does some handy tricks with groups that span both email and file permission/sharing concepts.

In my case, all the more reason to separate them, as many of the people with emails, even in my domain do not get shares access. They are my remote family members.

And most emailing is done via Thunderbird.

Les Mikesell wrote:

Robert Moskowitz wrote:

...

...

...

Also I would NEVER consider running SMB services on a gateway/firewall and I need IPv6 support anyway on the gateway/firewall. So far I have used Astaro with roll-your-own (Astaro predates the IPv6 /48 allocation), and I am getting a 'nice' box from a vendor I work with...

Agreed that separation is theoretically safer, but the scripted configuration on SME takes care of most of the things you would be likely to forget if you did it by hand (setting up iptables firewalling, hosts.allow, binding services only to the appropriate interface, adding ip range restrictions within the app configs, etc.).

My concern is not 'out of the box', and even there I have problems with their 1st update procedure. I have problems with the time lag between security bugs and updates applied.

Nearly all config changes on SME are done though it's web interface and all of the appropriate iptables/hosts.allow/apps configs are re-written as needed each time by the underlying scripts. The updates for the applications themselves should track Centos very closely since much of it is unchanged (except the mail system). You can just log in as root and do a 'yum update' if you have any trouble with the admin page hiding that from you. You just have to run a couple of commands that it will suggest afterwards.

Les, security IS my business. Now I work mostly on secure protocols, having co-chaired the IPsec work in the IETF, contributed to 802.11i, invented HIP, was the designer of the Federal PKI's Bridge CA, and a number of other activities. But I work with my company's (ICSAlabs) certification program, and the Firewall program is one of the major ones.

I have seen attacks and mitigations that often never make it out to the public, or make it out after we have worked with the vendors for weeks to get patches before the S* hits the fans. I am particularly paranoid about what may be exposed on a gateway/firewall while waiting for that all so important patch.

I don't like SME's laid back attitude to getting a 1st install patched, for example. One 1st install, all services on the server MUST be blocked until current updates are installed and configured, and only then opened.

So, no, your explaination does not make me feel more comfortable. But then as indicated, I am a hard one to make comfortable....

...

Gateway/firewalls have to be very conservative on services offered. There are ways to virtualize this, but SME has not done that.

...

The down side of two machines is that stock SME doesn't use LDAP network authentication and it does some handy tricks with groups that span both email and file permission/sharing concepts.

In my case, all the more reason to separate them, as many of the people with emails, even in my domain do not get shares access. They are my remote family members.

Having many different groups with different settings isn't a problem. You don't have to give shares to any particular group. But it saves time to be able to add members to a group and end up with both a mail alias that includes them and a group that can be given access to a file share or ftp location.

There is going to be further migration of both services. I felt, after being locked for years to some platforms, that more was better until things settled down here.

I want to be able to experiment with the server functions before I commit to shutting down the NT server, and I don't want to disrupt mail that I know I can get going quickly.

...

And most emailing is done via Thunderbird.

That's not particularly relevant - if you access from more than one location you might want to set up imaps access so all the messages are stored on the server and available through the hoard web interface if you aren't at you usual client(s).

I was at the IETF when IMAP was brought out of CMU and standardized, I know the beast all too well. I still use POP. A few users (like son #2) use the web interface. Most have one computer, either in the house or in their house for mail. POP works just fine. Plus once they POP their mail, it is no longer my problem!

Les Mikesell wrote:

Robert Moskowitz wrote:

...

I have seen attacks and mitigations that often never make it out to the public, or make it out after we have worked with the vendors for weeks to get patches before the S* hits the fans. I am particularly paranoid about what may be exposed on a gateway/firewall while waiting for that all so important patch.

I don't like SME's laid back attitude to getting a 1st install patched, for example. One 1st install, all services on the server MUST be blocked until current updates are installed and configured, and only then opened.

So, no, your explaination does not make me feel more comfortable. But then as indicated, I am a hard one to make comfortable....

I could have missed something, but I don't recall any services being open on the external nic until you configure them. Are any? If you have a 1-nic setup they probably assume that something else is handling the firewalling.

Let's talk paranoia...

I see that kernel 2.6.9-78.0.8 was in the install and yum updated that to 26.9.-78.0.13, what security patches were covered between those two releases? Perhaps something in NetFilter? Of course a BIND update. I have not done a 2 NIC install, and DNS is set up by default, so port 53 could be open.

But you are right, perhaps nothing is open until that first update. One would hope, but then I would have to test it! :)

And I need IPv6 so it is a mute point for me.

...

...

That's not particularly relevant - if you access from more than one location you might want to set up imaps access so all the messages are stored on the server and available through the hoard web interface if you aren't at you usual client(s).

I was at the IETF when IMAP was brought out of CMU and standardized, I know the beast all too well.

Yeah, on R4 and you still can't count on a good notification mechanism, but it is usable.

:)

I was also the first chair for iCal, so I will take the blame for that one too ;)'

I did get out of that job as fast as I could find someone qualified to lead those squabbling vendors.

Craig White wrote:

On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 21:48 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote:

...

And I need IPv6 so it is a mute point for me.

---

http://grammar.about.com/od/alightersideofwriting/a/mootmutegloss.htm

I am dyslexic. This is a trivial malaprop compared to many I have dropped.

My dear wife has suffered much with this....

But read "The Gift of Dyslexia" by Ron Burns. I think quite visually and 3 dimensionally; part of the reason I am in protocol design. I see networks and packets flashing around in my mind. Then comes the struggle to convert those images into words.

Craig White wrote:

On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 23:57 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote:

...

Craig White wrote:

...

On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 21:48 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote:

...

And I need IPv6 so it is a mute point for me.

---

http://grammar.about.com/od/alightersideofwriting/a/mootmutegloss.htm

I am dyslexic. This is a trivial malaprop compared to many I have dropped.

My dear wife has suffered much with this....

But read "The Gift of Dyslexia" by Ron Burns. I think quite visually and 3 dimensionally; part of the reason I am in protocol design. I see networks and packets flashing around in my mind. Then comes the struggle to convert those images into words.

---

sorry...don't mean to pick on you and my brother is dyslexic so I get it. I never pick on people's spelling.

I didn't relate the wrong usage of mute/moot to dyslexia and have a particular sensitivity to the number of people who use the fairly similar sounding words wrongly (and many do).

If you read Burn's book, you learn there are many flavors of Dyslexia. He even groups Dysgraphia in. My challenge is at the word level, not the letter level. I do word substitution when reading and writing. What is scary is when the substitution almost makes sense, but on inspection is obviously wrong. I have made some really phenomenal bloopers when speaking to large audiences and have been called on them and laughed along with my audience...

Grammer check is my VERY good friend....

Per Qvindesland wrote:

If your not to picky on calendar sharing and the other sharing options I can really recommend Qmailtoaster http://qmailtoaster.com/, rock solid piece of mail server with a really good web admin interface and a second to none support.

AH yes, Daniel's qmail. But this looks like a number of separate pieces that you put together yourself.

Calendaring is not important, and actually I am looking at what amahi.org has for my home.

Regards Per Qvindesland

On 3/17/09 8:24 PM, "Robert Moskowitz" rgm@htt-consult.com wrote:

...

IPv6 support

---

CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Well if you want to install QMT in a snap (about 30 minuts and no various scripts install) then download the full iso with centos in the bottom and really simple configuration steps from here http://qmtiso.com/

Regards Per Qvindesland

On 3/17/09 9:14 PM, "Dnk" d.k.emaillists@gmail.com wrote:

On 17-Mar-09, at 1:07 PM, Robert Moskowitz rgm@htt-consult.com wrote:

...

Per Qvindesland wrote:

...

If your not to picky on calendar sharing and the other sharing options I can really recommend Qmailtoaster http://qmailtoaster.com/, rock solid piece of mail server with a really good web admin interface and a second to none support.

AH yes, Daniel's qmail. But this looks like a number of separate pieces that you put together yourself.

Calendaring is not important, and actually I am looking at what amahi.org has for my home.

The qmailtoaster works GREAT. Putting it together is a snap.

The installation scrips do the bulk of the work.

So if looking for a good email server without the calendaring, have a look. Highly recommend the spamdyke add on. Great span option.

...

...

Regards Per Qvindesland

On 3/17/09 8:24 PM, "Robert Moskowitz" rgm@htt-consult.com wrote:

...

IPv6 support

---

CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

---

CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

---

CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos