(r5) ServerSoftware < Org

Org Web>InternetServer>ServerSoftware (revision 5) (raw view)~~EditAttach~~

---+ Server Software
Home for lists and debates of which software is going to be run on the InternetServer.

-- %MAINWEB%.BillMcGonigle - 20 Feb 2006

---+++ MTA

Votes for:
   * Sendmail
      * Main.MikeLedoux
   * postfix
      * Main.BillMcGonigle
   * qmail
   * exim
      * Main.ColeTuininga

Experience with (admin level):
   * Sendmail
      * Main.BillMcGonigle
      * Main.ColeTuininga (not in a long time though)
      * Main.MikeLedoux
      * Main.BruceDawson
   * postfix
      * Main.BillMcGonigle
      * Main.MikeLedoux
   * qmail
      * Main.BillMcGonigle
      * Main.MikeLedoux (brief, switched back to sendmail after 4-5 months)
   * exim
      * Main.ColeTuininga

Reasons for:
   * Sendmail
      * Installed by default  -- Main.BillMcGonigle - 20 Feb 2006
      * Would be useful to relearn to use it since it is fairly ubiquitous.  -- Main.ColeTuininga - 21 Feb 2006
   * postfix
      * Resonably easy to configure for most anything you can think of.  Support from most 3rd party packages (notably mailman).  Fast.  -- Main.BillMcGonigle - 20 Feb 2006
   * qmail
   * exim
      * Highly configurable, configuration quite readable, easy to configure.  -- Main.ColeTuininga - 21 Feb 2006

Reasons against:
   * Sendmail
      * Limiting - hard to do handstands.  Slow.  Most people can only work in .mc -- Main.BillMcGonigle - 20 Feb 2006
      * Cryptic to configure.  -- Main.ColeTuininga - 21 Feb 2006
   * postfix
   * qmail
      * Bizzare patch-acceptance policy and license.  Good installs typically require lots of   3rd party patches of variable quality.  -- Main.BillMcGonigle - 20 Feb 2006
   * exim
      * Not a lot of 3rd party support; needs wrappers for some common tasks.  -- Main.BillMcGonigle - 20 Feb 2006
         * Bill - can you elaborate on these?  -- Main.ColeTuininga - 21 Feb 2006
      * Not as widely known, fewer admins tend to be familiar with it.  -- Main.ColeTuininga - 21 Feb 2006

---+++ Anti-Spam

Votes for:
   * !MailScanner
      * Main.BillMcGonigle
   * !AMaVIS
   * !SpamAssassin
      * Main.ColeTuininga
      * Main.MikeLedoux
   * Spamhaus rbl(s)
      * Main.ColeTuininga
      * Main.BruceDawson (Not necessarily Spamhaus)

Experience with (admin level):
   * !MailScanner
      * Main.BillMcGonigle
   * !AMaVIS
   * !SpamAssassin
      * Main.ColeTuininga
      * Main.MikeLedoux
   * !RBLs
      * Main.ColeTuininga
      * Main.BruceDawson

Reasons for:
   * !MailScanner
      * Easy to configure, modify configuration, very flexible.  Auto-updates for !ClamAV, !RulesDuJour.  Integrates !SpamAssassin without separate daemon.  Disarms spam, phishing, viruses, "active" HTML mail. -- Main.BillMcGonigle - 20 Feb 2006
   * !AMaVIS
   * !SpamAssassin
      * Easily configured, low maintenance, good results, low-to-zero false-positives.  -- Main.MikeLedoux - 21 Feb 2006
   * !RBLs
      * Someone else does the bulk of the work -- Main.BruceDawson - 22 Feb 2006
      * Have a small footprint on the system  -- Main.BruceDawson - 22 Feb 2006
      * Catch 90% of the SPAM. -- Main.BruceDawson - 22 Feb 2006

Reasons against:
   * !MailScanner
      * Somewhat CPU intensive.  I've never seen decent hardware CPU bound by it though.  -- Main.BillMcGonigle - 20 Feb 2006
   * !AMaVIS
   * !RBLs
      * The lists are maintained by others -- Main.BruceDawson - 22 Feb 2006
      * Some discriminate against dynamic and other large block of IPs. -- Main.BruceDawson - 22 Feb 2006

Topic revision: r5 - 2006-02-22 - ColeTuininga

Site Tools
Search site
Site changes

Webs
GNHLUG
Main
Org
TWiki

Contact GNHLUG

All content is Copyright © 1999-2024 by, and the property of, the contributing authors.
Questions, comments, or concerns? Contact GNHLUG.
All use of this site subject to our Legal Notice (includes Terms of Service).