Re: FW: Ok, I'll show my ignorance...please help...?

[John Kougoulos <kugjon@panteion.gr>]

Hi,

a few weeks ago I asked in imap protocol mailing list about if it was
possible to store mailbox in an LDAP server.
Most of the answers discouraged me and now I'm convinced that LDAP isn't
suitable for such operations.
>From my point of view, imap is the way to go (I use UW) but, you should
configure some other mailbox format, other than traditional unix. MBX is
the best alternative I think.

If you prefer Exchange.... let the Force be with you..... :-)

John

Shawn Rutledge wrote:
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shawn Rutledge [mailto:shawn@ewisdom.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 1999 10:39 AM
> To: Ranjan Bagchi
> Subject: RE: Ok, I'll show my ignorance...please help...?
> 
> > Appointment scheduling works -- at least in a rudimentary way.
> > It sends an
> > email to the parties you want to schedule with, and outlook knows how to
> > handle it [it'll prompt you to add to the schedule.. ].  It is completly
> 
> Well yes but that doesn't require any server support (other than an email
> server).
> 
> > point-to-point, though:  no server can tell you at a glance who's
> > scheduled
> > to do what/be where.
> 
> Right.  An Exchange server can supposedly do that, because all the data that
> would normally be stored in a .pst file on your hard drive is stored on the
> server.  So contact databases can be shared, everyone can see everyone
> else's calendars, you can schedule meetings with automatic time-conflict
> resolution, etc.  We use a Linux mail server at work and my boss is
> threatening to buy Exchange (even though it would cost about the same as one
> of our salaries for a month, and we are a very poor startup!) just because
> he doesn't like the risk of having a nearly-gigabyte-sized pst file on his
> hard drive.  So I would like to solve this problem also.  IMAP would take
> care of the problems associated with storing email locally, but IMAP servers
> tend not to scale well.  (There are two free ones for Linux and both are
> memory hogs, getting drastically worse the more mail you have.)  I wouldn't
> expect an LDAP server to be good at storing old emails.  But I suspect he
> wants group scheduling features also.
> >
> > I'm curious about the answers too -- I've never seen an Exchange
> > deployment
> > in action and would like to see what's expected.
> >
> > -rj
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Shawn Rutledge [mailto:shawn@ewisdom.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 1999 9:16 AM
> > > To: Ranjan Bagchi; kevin@adclabs.com; trever@monster.com
> > > Cc: openldap-general@OpenLDAP.org
> > > Subject: RE: Ok, I'll show my ignorance...please help...?
> > >
> > >
> > > So what all can LookOut do with a directory?  Names and email
> > addresses I
> > > assume but can it totally replace an exchange server?  Group appointment
> > > scheduling?
> > >
> > > > Actually, you can indicate multiple suffixes in your slapd.conf.
> > > >
> > > > Mine has:
> > > >
> > > > suffix    ""
> > > > suffix    "o=NotTerriblyBigCorp,c=US"
> > > >
> > > > This works without any advanced features in Outlook.
> > > >
> > > > -rj
> > > >
> > > > [FWIW:  Your solution's actually nicer for a more scalable
> > > solution, IMHO.
> > > > My understanding is you can design a custom Outlook deployment
> > > > package which
> > > > installs on everyone's machine with settings particular
> > > > to your site.  But I don't know how to do that yet]
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > It might also help to know, that after setting it up
> > happily, I had to
> > > > > add my suffix in the Search Base - which is under the
> > advanced part of
> > > > > the settings in Outlook. In my case it was "o=AdcLabs, c=US".
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >