| 1 |
lo, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Monday 30 May 2005 16:00, Ryan Lynch wrote: |
| 4 |
> On Mon, 30 May 2005 10:37:16 +0200 |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Peter Eis <eis@×××××××××××××.de> wrote: |
| 7 |
> > Rodrigo Schulte wrote: |
| 8 |
> > >Hi! |
| 9 |
> > >Please, |
| 10 |
> > >I looking for the most used, more documentation, the best, etc... DNS, |
| 11 |
> > >Firewall and Mail Server. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Everyone is going to have their own preferences for these utilities and their |
| 14 |
own reasons for doing so. In my opinion if you are looking to do serious |
| 15 |
deployments of the above (read performance / scalibility / uptime are |
| 16 |
important) then the following would be my pick: |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
* dns - bind. Bind continues to be the main dns implementation and while some |
| 19 |
people like other lighter altnatives I find that they tend not to have |
| 20 |
dnssec / tsig implementations that are important to me. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
* firewall - like the other people here I recommend shorewall due to its |
| 23 |
complete solutions. Another option to consider is fwbuilder which basically |
| 24 |
provides a nice gui to generating your own iptable configs. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
* mail - this question is perhaps the most loaded of them all. In my opinion |
| 27 |
its hard to beat postfix + cyrus + ldap for serious deployments. Ldap is |
| 28 |
optimised for lookups and beats db's in this regard, its also lighter and |
| 29 |
easier to replicate. Cyrus itself continues to be the most important imap |
| 30 |
implementation and drives most of the new features. It is also very scalable |
| 31 |
and performant. postfix is light years ahead of qmail :) /me waits patiently |
| 32 |
for the flames. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
b |
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Benjamin Smee (strerror) |
| 37 |
497F 5E98 1FA0 C313 EA0B 08C7 004A 66ED 448B E78C |
Archives