Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 21:21:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Matt Heckaman <matt@ARPA.MAIL.NET> To: "Gary D. Margiotta" <gary@tbe.net> Cc: FreeBSD-ISP <freebsd-isp@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: freebsd hosting. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0005022113210.9170-100000@epsilon.lucida.qc.ca> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0005022057150.49780-100000@thud.tbe.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 2 May 2000, Gary D. Margiotta wrote: : Gonna start a holy war here, but for a 'newbie' I'd rather reccommend : Postfix instead of Q-Mail. I have used both, and Q-mail to me : just seems too much patching and work to get it to do the simplest things, : like rbl lookups, spam control, etc. I'll try not to make this post anything that will further a holy war, I also turned to postfix at first for the task. It's a nice system, but I find it cluttered, and I find the virtual hosting far more complex than it needs to be. Regarding spam control, one (and only one) patch solved this entire problem to me, thanks to Michael Graff <explorer@flame.org> which can be found at http://www.flame.org/qmail. : Postfix is a little more like sendmail, and is I think a bit better at : delegating for virtual hosting and aliasing (over Q-Mail at least)... I : have two machines running FreeBSD with Postfix, doing e-mail for over 250 : domains - nary a problem. Fair enough, I think it's a matter of opinion. Try both systems out, pick one you like and go for it. Both are capable of doing the job, thus making our personal preferences rather redundant =) : Co-location is definitely a better way to go than a frame, IMHO. We have : a rack, and it's much less expensive than running a frame to your house. : There are inconveniences, such as not having the boxes right on premises, : and needing to go to the provider if you need to do work, but for the : cost/connectivity, you really can't beat it. Absolutely - However, the last time I was in colocation, I had to make appointments to get to my box, once taking over a week to get in to fix a downed server, needless to say I was pissed off and left them shortly thereafter; replacing the whole colocation situation with a T1 from UUnet, and I'm much happier with it, haven't had the slightest problem. : DSL is still in its infancy, and if you need uptime, you still won't get : it reliably yet. Too many bugs to still work out. Yep, not to mention it doesn't seem to be a priority for companies to fix when something goes wrong. Sympatico has taken along time to fix some of their problems before. : Just my $.02, I'll shut up now... ;) ditto =) : -Gary Matt Heckaman matt@arpa.mail.net http://www.lucida.qc.ca -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: http://www.lucida.qc.ca/pgp iD8DBQE5D38MdMMtMcA1U5ARAsHQAKCZgTzviHkG+OFBWuFkL//zdxLlbQCg7glD ouaRLAVVyzbDrYkvS6vBnME= =pKOa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0005022113210.9170-100000>