Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 19 Sep 2014 08:12:33 -0600 (MDT)
From:      Dale Scott <dalescott@shaw.ca>
To:        Arthur Chance <freebsd@qeng-ho.org>
Cc:        Matthew Seaman <matthew@FreeBSD.org>, "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: is pkg saying courier and postfix are incompatible?
Message-ID:  <F7EA154A-8B44-4BA2-9787-2C8FEA8DE987@shaw.ca>
In-Reply-To: <541BDA6D.3060702@qeng-ho.org>
References:  <005201cfd2bd$d8ac34d0$8a049e70$@shaw.ca> <9745AE56F096E150A334CBD1@[192.168.1.50]> <D5F199B3-79EF-4CED-B373-EA8CD2E6A265@shaw.ca> <541A7518.7030603@FreeBSD.org> <009601cfd398$51ca0ec0$f55e2c40$@shaw.ca> <541BD0C1.6080509@FreeBSD.org> <541BDA6D.3060702@qeng-ho.org>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
> On Sep 19, 2014, at 1:25 AM, Arthur Chance <freebsd@qeng-ho.org> wrote:
>=20
>> On 19/09/2014 07:44, Matthew Seaman wrote:
>>> On 19/09/2014 00:28, Dale Scott wrote:
>>> I installed postfix-2.11.1_4,1 as a pkg and just noticed "pkg info
>>> postfix" reports DOVECOT and OPENLDAP options are off. Do I need
>>> these in my scenarios? I didn't put a ports tree on this system to
>>> see if it was possible to build a system from packages only, but am
>>> also not averse to recognizing it was pipe dream (and remember how to
>>> use portmaster again).
>>=20
>> You can use postfix with dovecot without having to enable the DOVECOT
>> option -- as I recall, that's something to do with postfix using the
>> dovecot authentication mechanisms.
>=20
> That's correct, it's to enable postfix to use dovecot's SASL interface to=
 authorise users when postfix requires authorisation for mail submission. M=
uch nicer to have one mechanism rather than two that might get out of sync.=
 However, if authorisation is enforced via /etc/passwd or LDAP, you've alre=
ady got your mechanism so don't need dovecot's.
>=20
>> You only need OPENLDAP turned on for postfix if you want to use ldap
>> lookups.  (Well Duh!) For a stand-alone system without many users, ldap
>> is overkill, and you would generally be better off using lmdb or bdb
>> files instead (I prefer lmdb -- seems simpler and to have fewer overhead=
s).
>=20
> And it's fast, if you have a lot of mail to process.
>=20
>>> Is there anything special needed in Dovecot?
>>=20
>> No.  Either you configure postfix to use dovecot's delivery agent, or
>> you make postfix speak LMTP to dovecot: from dovecot's perspective it
>> doesn't need to know anything about or do anything differently depending
>> on what MTA you're using.
>=20
> LMTP has the advantage that postfix and dovecot can be in separate jails =
for extra security.

Thanks for all the help. I'm building a fully *self-contained* proof-of-con=
cept business system with MantisBT as an ISO9000 issue tracker, Tryton for =
managing equipment and material loaned to client jobs and returned, OpenLDA=
P for single point of authentication (enterprise is MS AD), and mail workin=
g between users, Mantis and Tryton. I'll use Mutt in the first round of dem=
os, but will provide RoundCube for demo users to access mail themselves (on=
ce virtual mail users are working). I'm ignoring security for now, too much=
 to learn, create keys and configure, and the IT group will have their own =
ideas anyway if the POC proceeds to production. Hopefully it won't look too=
 disjointed, the alternative is maybe funding in 2016 for the IT team to bu=
ild the same thing but with better icons (and by clicking through MS wizard=
s ;-))

It could be a nice bonus if I could use my desktop Outlook client to retrie=
ve all the mail from Dovecot via pop3 and forward it into the enterprise sy=
stem so demo users could really experience the POC, but the POC can't conne=
ct directly to any enterprise services (e.g mail) for now. Any comments on =
this approach?

Dale




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F7EA154A-8B44-4BA2-9787-2C8FEA8DE987>