Storing Duplicate Copies of Quarantine

[Brian O'Keeffe]

Glenn Steen wrote:
> On 17/01/2008, Brian O'Keeffe <brian.okeeffe at kepak.com> wrote:
>   
>> Glenn Steen wrote:
>>     
>>> On 17/01/2008, Brian O'Keeffe <brian.okeeffe at kepak.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I'm running two mail gateways with MailScanner and MailWatch, I've
>>>> trying to give users access to release their quarantined mails using
>>>> MailWatch's quarantine report but want to give users a single point of
>>>> contact rather than getting reports from both gateways and releasing
>>>> mails from both.
>>>> I've set up NFS shares so that the gateways can write to each other and
>>>> set up Master-Master replication on the MySql databases on both. Where
>>>> I'm having a problem is getting MailScanner to write Quarantined files
>>>> to the quarantine folder on the box that its running on and also to the
>>>> quarantine on the other gateway.  I've got it writing to the archive on
>>>> both machines but just can't get the quarantine to do the same. Is there
>>>> some way I can write a ruleset to achieve this?
>>>>
>>>> Any assistance, ideas or comments would be very gratefully received.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Brian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> Why go through all this, when MailWatch can log to one DB and release
>>> (through XML-RPC) from both?
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>>       
>> Thanks Glenn but I'm trying to build in redundancy as well, so if one
>> gateway drops then the other still has everything necessary and at most
>> all i need do is activate the MailWatch Quarantine report. Am I
>> misreading the MailWatch documentation or can I use the XML-RPC to do this.
>>
>>     
> Hi Brian,
>
> Hm, nah I don'tmthink you are, not wrt redundacy.
> Thing is you'll have to take XML-RPC and how this all is implemented
> in MW into account anyway, since the release functions look at where
> the quarantined item is stored (on which machine). Not that big a
> deal, just something that need be handled, if one (like you) plan to
> have the machines be completely redundant.
> The XML-RPC stuff simply place a call to do the action on the "other
> host" as needed, so ... not exactly what you are trying to do.
>
> What I meant was that your approach is rather more complex than using
> the simple thing that is already present, for data that mostly is very
> ... "losable":-):-).
>
> Cheers
>   
Hi Glenn

Seemed like a reasonably straightforward idea when I started out, might 
just try using rsync to handle the quarantine files.

Thanks

Brian

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.