Using MySQL or LDAP for your backend would make it easy to share the work load of qmailadmin and other things on other systems.
-John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jesse Guardiani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "vpopmail" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 10:03 AM Subject: [vchkpw] vpopmail as a daemon > Greetings list, > > I'm sure people have considered this before, but I'd like to collect everyone's thoughts on the idea I'm about to present: > > VPopMail as a daemon > -------------------- > What does everyone think about the possibility of turning vpopmail into a daemon? Complete with network ports and the like. It would > allow for a much more distributed architecture, IMHO. > > Currently, if someone wants to run qmailadmin on a separate web server, they have to create an NFS share, right? > > Wouldn't it make a lot of sense to provide a vpopmail network protocol that allows connections from remote administrative utilities? > > Possibly even implement support for vpopmail clusters (although I'm thinking you'd have to have a crazy amount of users to need a > cluster! Vpopmail is pretty darn efficient.) > > Administrative programs like qmailadmin and vqadmin would benefit by not having to be run on the primary mail server, but I highly > doubt that the majority of web traffic comes from the admin CGIs. > > Programs like sqwebmail would benefit by not having to be recompiled every time vpopmail is upgraded. The port protocol wouldn't > change much between versions, and developers could maintain backward compatibility. > > Sqwebmail WOULDN'T be able to run on a separate server, as it accesses maildirs directly, but at least administration, upgrades, and > general package stability would likely improve a bit. > > Who knows. One might even be able to implement a maildir access protocol. But that would probably just duplicate the functionality > of the IMAP protocol. > > Can anyone else think of a good reason why vpopmail might benefit from bei ng made into a daemon? > > Can anyone think of a really good reason why it shouldn't? (Other than the time it would take to code everything.) > > I'm just thinking aloud here, but I'd like to hear everyone's ideas on the matter. > > Thanks, > > -- > Jesse Guardiani, Systems Administrator > WingNET Internet Services, > P.O. Box 2605 // Cleveland, TN 37320-2605 > 423-559-LINK (v) 423-559-5145 (f) > http://www.wingnet.net > > We are actively looking for companies that do a lot of long > distance faxing and want to cut their long distance bill by > up to 50%. Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more info. > > > >
