On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 13:00 +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> > > Can you suggest an POP/IMAP proxy ?
> >
> > We're using "perdition" here: http://www.vergenet.net/linux/perdition/
>
> If I understand this right, than all traffic is routed VIA this proxy.
> Right ?
Correct.
[...]
> It is not a simpel redirect/hint where the Mailbox-Server is to find?
There's nothing in smtp / pop / imap to allow http like redirects. So
if you want a central entry point it has to act as a proxy.
[...]
> and geting Messages from IMAP/POP via proxy
>
> postgresql
> |
> |for the Mailbox-Server lookup
> |
> $USER +---->------- mx.domain.tld ----->---+
> in / in \ mbox-fr.domain.tld
> France +----<-----+ Morocco +---<---+ in France
If you're going to have a central proxy for collection then it'll be the
choke point through which all the traffic has to pass. With the
geographic diversity you're looking at then this will introduce
inefficiencies.
Why not have geographic hostnames for people to connect to
pop.fr.mydomain.com
pop.uk.mydomain.com
etc etc
Which are perdition proxies which are capable of handling any user but
act as the "local" access point for each region? That way you can also
have a global host "pop.mydomain.com" which is simply a round robin A
record for all the geographic ones to handle anyone who happens to
wander around the globe.
> Another person had told me that it would be better if I use an
> ISP in Euro for the Mailservices but I do not know, because my
> $USER will increase and I do not like to put 1.000.000 $USER
> or more in the Hand of an external ISP.
That's really a choice you'll have to make. If you setup and manage the
services yourself then you've got the absolute control but you're also
responsible for making it work. If you give the job to a hosting outfit
then you're putting the responsibility on someone else but you're losing
control.
Mark
--
Mark <hamster@???>
