Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 4 Apr 2007 11:59:09 -0400
From:      Richard Coleman <rcoleman@criticalmagic.com>
To:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Cc:        ports@freebsd.org, Anton Blajev <ablajev@sofiasoftsolutions.com>, Jona Joachim <walkingshadow@grummel.net>
Subject:   Re: cyrus-sasl alternative?
Message-ID:  <200704041159.10517.rcoleman@criticalmagic.com>
In-Reply-To: <4613AE91.80309@mikestammer.com>
References:  <461217B7.4000409@sofiasoftsolutions.com> <4613A818.20605@my.domain> <4613AE91.80309@mikestammer.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 09:56:33 am Eric wrote:
> > If you also need a POP3/IMAP server you might want to take a look at
> > Dovecot. I'm using Dovecot SASL.
>
> maybe i missed something, but whats wrong with the sasl2 port? isnt that
> what most people are using already?

I've used both Dovecot and Cyrsus sasl.  I would say that Dovecot sasl is much 
easier to install than Cyrsu sasl.  It is implemented as a daemon to which an 
application communicates via a domain socket rather than as a shared library 
(which is how Cyrus sasl is implemented).   Because of this setup and due to 
the fact that the configuration is done in a single configuration file, it is 
more "self contained" from a design perspective.

The downsides of Dovecot sasl are:

1) It is not available separately from the Dovecot IMAP/POP server (at the 
moment) so it makes the most sense for people that are already using Dovecot 
IMAP/POP.
2) Although Postfix can use Dovecot sasl, it can only use it for server side 
sasl (although this is not a problem for most sites).

But they both work, and there are plenty of people using either one.

Richard Coleman
rcoleman@criticalmagic.com



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200704041159.10517.rcoleman>