Linux Email

[Georgina]

Hello Everyone,

Our company email server is Exchange 5.5 running on an old NT4.0 server. We are wanting to upgrade to a newer system, but the big boss doesn't want to spend the money for all new hardware and the complete Windows upgrade.

We started kicking around the idea of running a Linux email server. No one in house has any previous Linux experience. I assume Linux HAS an email server

If so, any suggestions as to which flavor of Linux we should try? How complicated is setting one up?

Appreciate any input.

G

[alpha]

First of all, here is something that niggles me. Whenever someone opens thier eyes to an OS beyond Windows, the first one they hit is always Linux. Heres an idea, forget Linux. Look into FreeBSD. I won't bother listing advantages and disadvantages of FreeBSD over other operating systems, but I will say that there are many.

The email server you use depends on the number of users you will be serving. If it is only a handful I would use qmail. However, if you are talking about thousands of users, perhaps Courier would be more suitable. Both are available for FreeBSD and Linux.

Please, don't disregard FreeBSD just because you may not have heard of it before. The only reason it is less popular than Linux is because people either don't know about it, or they refuse to try it (or they refuse to admit it is better than Linux).

Not intending to start a flame war here, but I thought it wouldn't be a bad idea to pimp FreeBSD before everyone starts posting Linux-oriented comments.

[TheOtherPhil]

FreeBSD is great but let's be honest, the ease of installation is nowhere near as easy as a modern Linux distro. It is far from hard but for a person with no previous *nix experience, FreeBSD will be daunting. Getting an email server up and running in most of the popular Linux distro's is a matter of point and click....very familiar for a Windows user.

[alpha]

Originally posted by TheOtherPhil
FreeBSD is great

Yes, it is.

but let's be honest, the ease of installation is nowhere near as easy as a modern Linux distro.

"Oh that's difficult to install, so I won't bother."

It is far from hard but for a person with no previous *nix experience, FreeBSD will be daunting.

The whole installation process is very well documented.

Getting an email server up and running in most of the popular Linux distro's is a matter of point and click....very familiar for a Windows user.

That is assuming you want to use the default mail server, which is most likely sendmail. I doubt sendmail will be ideal for the OP, therefore a different one will have to be installed and configured, which by no means is as simple as pointing and clicking.

Getting an email server up and running is down to how the authors want you to configure their software. Whether I am using FreeBSD or Linux, to configure qmail I still have to go around editing a bunch of text files from the command line.

[FoBoT]

yo dudes, how about comparing exchange and the open source email alternatives ?

keep in mind that many companies don't view exchange as just email, they DEPEND on all the other features that outlook has, meeting scheduling is almost always used, some companies use the "Task" function to pin things on people

how about a comparison of what is available to run on non-Winders OS's to Exchange?

[Dyyryath]

I like FreeBSD. In fact, I've got a FreeBSD and an OpenBSD server both running here at the house. While most people "in the know" tout FreeBSD as being more "stable" than Linux, I don't buy that. I've got a Linux server here with nearly two years of uptime without a reboot. I've got several more at work with similar uptimes. If installed & administered correctly, I'd rate FreeBSD & Linux about on par for stability.

Now, I will give the edge to FreeBSD for some of their tools, which I think are often better than their GNU equivalents that you generally find in a Linux distro. I'll also say that I like the ports system and standardized install locations better than the myriad different ways to install things found in the top Linux distros. Gentoo, of course, is the exception among Linux distros, using a ports based system as well.

Having said all that, I'm going to agree that for a company with no Unix experience, Linux would be an easier choice. FreeBSD's got some good documentation, but Linux has more. A modern Linux distro is also easier to install, though a good admin should be able to handle either with ease. Linux can also give you more options software-wise than FreeBSD, though most of the good stuff runs fine on both.

I'm actually responsible for the mail servers (and DNS servers, DHCP servers, web servers, firewalls, etc) for a multi-million dollar company. While I really like FreeBSD (and run it at home on my stuff), at work all of our servers are Mandrake Linux. Why? It's mostly about potential options, not because FreeBSD isn't more than capable. Our mail servers in particular use a combination Postfix, Spamassassin, Anomy Sanitizer, and NAI's vscan for Unix. In fact, we actually replaced our Exchange system with this setup about 4 years ago when I became responsible for these systems.

Considerations about *BSD vs Linux aside, there are some things you should know. Exchange is more than just an email system. It's a groupware suite that (as you know) handles calendars & such. Unix email systems tend to be straight email. You will give up some stuff in the move. For us, it wasn't an issue. The additional features provided by Exchange weren't being used anyway, so it wasn't a big loss. Your company might be different. Make sure you look very closely at this before making any decisions. It could come back to bite you in the ass.

You could easily setup a straight email system for free, but if you're willing to spend *some* money and the groupware stuff is important to you, you could also look at something like this:

Suse OpenExchange

It's pricey, though cheaper than Exchange 2003. An additional benefit (over Exchange) is that only people actually using the groupware stuff need a client license. If the vast majority of your users just want regular email, you can save quite a bit of money this way. I haven't deployed it, but we have looked at it for possible use and it seems very nice.

[TheOtherPhil]

OK, how about SUSE's OpenExchange server software? It is pretty neat and provides all the functions similar to Exchange. Try the online demo here.

[TheOtherPhil]

Damn, beaten too it

[IronBits]

Just so there are more options, let me throw one at ya.
ftgate pro for email only and AVG for anti-virus, both run on your existing windows platform and are very reasonably priced.
I use them here at home as a family mail server to strip virus and spam.
overkill maybe, but Dyyryath has yet to teach me how to setup a Linux one.

[IronBits]

Originally posted by TheOtherPhil
Damn, beaten too it

It's GOOD to hear from you tho!!!

[TheOtherPhil]

[PCZ]

Exchange is more than just email.
There is no open source alternative.
Suse will try and sell you groupware but it is not as flexible as exchange and it is damm expensive.
Open source is about Free software you put it with the limitations because it is FREE
You don't pay a shit load of money to some one like SUSE for substandard hard to administrator rubbish you buy exchange.

[Dyyryath]

Here's how I see it:

If all of my users need a complete groupware suite (and they're on Windows), then Exchange is a no-brainer.

If all of my users need regular Internet email, but can do without the extra group features, then Postfix/Qmail/Exim on Linux is a no-brainer.

If *some* of my users need groupware and others don't, it gets a little more complicated. At first glance, Exchange 2003 (Standard Edition) is $699 and OpenExchange is $1,249. Exchange 2003 looks like a winner. However, while both require client access licenses, the rules about who needs them are different, which can lead to some serious changes in the price comparison. Additionally, with Windows, you have to figure in another $1000 for the server OS that Exchange 2003 runs on.

Here's the scenario at my company:

We've got about 300 email users. Of them, only about 20 (management types) have any need for the complete groupware stuff. That gives me two scenarios:

MS Exchange: $21,798 - It breaks down like this:

Windows 2003 Server: $999
Exchange 2003 Standard: $699
Client Access License: 300 x $67 = $20,100

Suse OpenExchange: $1,747 - It breaks down like this:

OpenExchange -w- 10 CALs: $1,249
10 more CALs: $498
No license required for standard POP/IMAP email access

That's about a $20k difference, primarily because MS requires that anyone accessing an Exchange server (in any way) needs a CAL. However, even if I bought access licenses for everyone on OpenExchange, it'd still be cheaper:

OpenExchange: $1,249
250 CALs: $9,499
50 CALs: $2,249

TOTAL: $12,997

Now, I'm not going to argue which one is easier to administer, or which one is a more polished piece of software. I'd probably give the nod to Exchange 2003 on both of those counts (if we're talking about a company with Windows admins). However, is it $20k better? From our testing (which makes OpenExchange look quite capable of meetings our needs), I'd say "NO" rather emphatically. My budget has plenty of other places that I could put that $20k to better use.

[Georgina]

Wow, a lot of feedback. Thanks everyone.

alpha,

You're right, I never thought of FreeBSD. Even thought I had heard of it before, I really didn't know what it was. Now I do. However, being a mostly Windows shop, I thought a packaged distro with an update app would be easier for a transision.

everone,

We have about 150 email seats, and I honstly don't believe anyone is using any of the extras that Exchange has (scheduling, etc.), so just an email sever should work just fine.


Dyyryath and TheOtherPhil,

I haven't looked into OpenExchange yet, but if we're just using the email, we probably don't need it.


From reading the above, the email options include: gmail, Courier, SendMail and PostFix for Linux, and FTGate Pro for Win. As I said, I don't think we need OpenExchange at this time.

I'm off to do some more investigation. Thanks !

G

[Dyyryath]

I'd probably drop Sendmail from your list, Georgina. It's an extremely flexible, powerful MTA, but it's also got the steepest learning curve (by far) and the worst security record. Under Linux, the three big ones are Postfix, Qmail, & Exim. I personally like Postfix the best, but Qmail is good, too. I've read about Courier, but never tested with it. It's supposed to be good as well.

Another decision you'll need to make is how users will get their mail from the server. Will you be using shell accounts (probably not)? POP? IMAP? An SSL protected version of POP or IMAP? This can affect what kind of mailbox structure you use and hence, which MTA will work best (though each should support all of the various mailbox incarnations). If you intend to offer some type of web-mail access, the mailbox type is also an issue. Squirrel mail (which works well with any IMAP system) is a good choice for this. Courier has it's own.

I've spent a great deal of time handling mail systems, so if you run into problems or have any specific questions, feel free to post them or email me directly and I'll do my best to answer them.

[Georgina]

Originally posted by Dyyryath
<snip>
I've spent a great deal of time handling mail systems, so if you run into problems or have any specific questions, feel free to post them or email me directly and I'll do my best to answer them.

Thanks for all the good info. I'm not the admin. In fact, I'm not officially in the IT dept, but I do some of the engineering programming for them when they're busy so I have a good relationship with them.

I have done the research, then the nag afterward to get them to move forward several times (it was my nagging 4 years ago that got us email ).

I appreciate the offer and may take you up on it, but for now I've got a little more negotiating to do.

G

[alpha]

Originally posted by Georgina
alpha,

You're right, I never thought of FreeBSD. Even thought I had heard of it before, I really didn't know what it was. Now I do. However, being a mostly Windows shop, I thought a packaged distro with an update app would be easier for a transision.

"A packaged distro"? I'm not sure what you mean by that. FreeBSD comes in the form of an ISO, or you can install via FTP, or via a LAN, or many other options. Software used on FreeBSD comes in the form of pre-compiled binaries (called packages), or ports which is a skeleton tree for building ported source code. I'm not sure what you mean.

"...with an update app". FreeBSD has CVSup for bringing all your sources up to date, and portupgrade for (automatically) upgrading applications installed from source.

FreeBSD may not be suitable for you, but I think you are unaware of some its features.

[Beyond]

Originally posted by alpha
First of all, here is something that niggles me. Whenever someone opens thier eyes to an OS beyond Windows, the first one they hit is always Linux. Heres an idea, forget Linux. Look into FreeBSD. I won't bother listing advantages and disadvantages of FreeBSD over other operating systems, but I will say that there are many.

The email server you use depends on the number of users you will be serving. If it is only a handful I would use qmail. However, if you are talking about thousands of users, perhaps Courier would be more suitable. Both are available for FreeBSD and Linux.

Please, don't disregard FreeBSD just because you may not have heard of it before. The only reason it is less popular than Linux is because people either don't know about it, or they refuse to try it (or they refuse to admit it is better than Linux).

Not intending to start a flame war here, but I thought it wouldn't be a bad idea to pimp FreeBSD before everyone starts posting Linux-oriented comments.

me decided to give FreeBSD a try, downloaded 5.1, in the process of loading it now. Any pitfalls I should be awre of?

[Paratima]

Originally posted by Beyond
Any pitfalls I should be awre of?

Yes. An operating system is a (hopefully well-connected) suite of programs. Every program is a compromise.

[Beyond]

Originally posted by Paratima
Yes. An operating system is a (hopefully well-connected) suite of programs. Every program is a compromise.

so true....



Oh man, this takes me back to my days of fun installing TurboLinux 4.0, ncursers graphical install routine.

[alpha]

Originally posted by Beyond
me decided to give FreeBSD a try, downloaded 5.1, in the process of loading it now. Any pitfalls I should be awre of?

Yes. 5.1 is a development, work-in-progress release. Stick to the 4.x series.

[Beyond]

Originally posted by alpha
Yes. 5.1 is a development, work-in-progress release. Stick to the 4.x series.

too late, already installed and running dnet on 2 systems as we speak...

[alpha]

man tuning.

[Beyond]

Originally posted by alpha
man tuning.

[pointwood]

Originally posted by PCZ
Exchange is more than just email.
There is no open source alternative.
Suse will try and sell you groupware but it is not as flexible as exchange and it is damm expensive.
Open source is about Free software you put it with the limitations because it is FREE
You don't pay a shit load of money to some one like SUSE for substandard hard to administrator rubbish you buy exchange.

Not quite true

I don't know Suse's solution or how good or bad it is, but it sounds like you don't like it for some reason. Could you say a bit more about why you dislike their product?

A completely open source solution do exist though: http://kolab.kde.org/

It's got the standard groupware functionality, but it is still young and most likely don't have all the features of Exhcange, but stable versions have been released and it is getting improved all the time.

The project is sponsered by some part of the German government.

The current primary client is of course an open source client which will eventually be part of KDE. You need to buy a plugin if you want to use Outlook together with it.

[alpha]

Originally posted by Beyond

Sorry, I meant read the tuning manpage.

$ man tuning