[OpenAFS] mail spool on AFS

[Neulinger, Nathan]

Another simpler option is to just use something like perdition. It's a proxy
server for IMAP and POP. As long as you add support to it for determining
which server to connect to, all your clients can be pointed at the same DNS
name for mail service. Also is a convenient place to provide SSL support
since it shifts the SSL load off your mail servers.

-- Nathan

------------------------------------------------------------
Nathan Neulinger                       EMail:  nneul@umr.edu
University of Missouri - Rolla         Phone: (573) 341-4841
Computing Services                       Fax: (573) 341-4216


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nathan Rawling [mailto:nrawling@firedrake.net] 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 10:26 AM
> To: Derek Atkins
> Cc: Enesha Fairluck; openafs-info@openafs.org
> Subject: Re: [OpenAFS] mail spool on AFS
> 
> 
> On 20 Nov 2001, Derek Atkins wrote:
> 
> > Nathan Rawling <nrawling@firedrake.net> writes:
> > 
> > > By adding LDAP, or another directory service in front of 
> this system (ex,
> > > X.500 similar to Umich) you can easily migrate users 
> between servers as
> > > well. It could be implemented using flat files and DNS 
> only, but it would
> > > probably be a real hassle to maintain.
> > 
> > MIT uses Hesiod, which is based on DNS.  The management is
> > via a database that writes out the DNS file.  This way users
> > can be migrated -- the mail apps look up the POServer in Hesiod
> > to find out which Mail Server to contact.
> 
> How much code-modification was required to add this support to the
> mailreaders? I believe that Hesiod was added into Pine a 
> while back, but
> I'm curious which other mailreaders would be ready to go.
> 
> I'll be honest Hesiod, scares me. It obviously works, but it 
> just seems
> like a lot to build on DNS. =)
> 
> Last time I looked at it (a year ago or more) Umich did it by 
> breaking up
> the userbase into 26 groups by the first letter of the username and
> balancing those groups onto servers using DNS mappings. But if more
> granular support were required, you could divvy up the 
> userbase into more
> groups based on some other hashing mechanism. I can see 
> though that pretty
> soon you end up architecting Hesiod all over again. However, 
> unless you
> have a gigantic user load, or really wimpy mailservers it might be
> overkill.
> 
> Nathan
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenAFS-info mailing list
> OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
> https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
>