Out of Topic: IMAP

[Richard Frovarp]

Res wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Roger Jochem wrote:
>
>> Since almost everyone here nows a lot about e-mail, server 
>> configuration, and that kind of stuff, I was wondering: how many of 
>> you use IMAP instead of POP3 for mail access?
>>
>
> We use imap on localhost only for webmail, remote users don't have 
> access to it and use pop3.
>
> On other servers that use maildir format, no imap, they use sqwebmail 
> and pop3 which serves very well.
>
> A downside to imap is the constant login-do_request-logout
> so you'd need some sort of proxy on heavy use servers or your log 
> spool will be full in a day :)
>
> If I have to build more? It would be pop3.
>
We run imapproxy on our webmail boxes. This is a requirement just due to 
how webmail works. We have a moderate horse powered box (Dual 2.4 Xeon, 
2GB of RAM) handling 13K users all running IMAP via webmail or stand 
alone client. The one that handles 19K users has slightly more power 
behind it, only due to the fact it used to be the oldest and was up for 
replacement.

The boxes were heavily overloaded back when they were calling 
SpamAssassin. Having MailScanner on machines in front has fixed that 
problem. Indexed (mbx format) inboxes also helped.