[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  "David Cavanaugh" <dcavanaugh at thewebpros dot net>
 To:  "ss" <sonicsai at gmail dot com>, "Malte S. Stretz" <msquadrat dot nospamplease at gmx dot net>
 Cc:  <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  RE: [m0n0wall] anti-spam appliance?
 Date:  Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:01:24 -0500
> anti-spam should be on a mail server. . .

Yeah. I can see that.

Additionally, I noticed that there is Loadbalancing / High Availability
on the wish list. Moreover, while I originally thought it would be a
great feature to add; now I'm not so sure. I think that should be a
different project entirely-- and boy someone needs to jump on it.

I've tired just about every "free" solution out there: "Red Hat E3" (and
"TAO"), "Ultramonkey", "lvs-kiss", "lvs gui", straight up "ipvsadmn"; as
well as Zeus and Loadbalancer.org (which, was the only one I got to
actually work-- but it costs $1700 US). I've gone so far as to write my
own GUI front end to ipvsadmn (I'm one of those Java snobs), but I
haven't finished yet, and I'll probably never finish it.

If m0n0wall is any indication of the programming prowess of the
developers, then a separate NLB / HA solution would be the cat's meow.

Best regards,

Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: ss [mailto:sonicsai at gmail dot com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 3:02 AM
To: Malte S. Stretz
Cc: m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
Subject: Re: [m0n0wall] anti-spam appliance?

anti-spam should be on a mail server, IMHO. I think that this is the
philosophy that m0n0 follows also.
A firewall should be totally secure, extremely reliable. This does not
happen if you have all sorts of software running on your firewall
machine.

There are firewalls out there that have anti-spam and anti-virus
funtions builtin. These are technically suspect solutions that are
marketing fueled and bought by sysadmins that want a simple system
that does everything. However the sysadmin gets the complexity without
getting the reliability that he wants.


On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 02:16:59 +0200, Malte S. Stretz
<msquadrat dot nospamplease at gmx dot net> wrote:
> On Monday 28 March 2005 23:38 CET Habers, Jonathan wrote:
> > Are there any plans for the author of m0n0wall to create an
ANTI-SPAM
> > appliance like the m0n0wall? Or is there already one out there.
> 
> Have a look at the SpamAssassin Wiki, I think there are some links.
> 
> Whatever, m0n0wall is designed for diskless and more or less stateless
(ie.
> when you reboot everything's gone) appliances with relatively low-end
> hardware.  That would mean that SpamAssassin had to run crippled with
> disabled learning facilities (Bayes etc.) and would probably bog down
the
> machine a lot.  Or to sum it up:  It won't work like m0n0 is designed
and
> if you created an anti-spam appliance, it wouldn't have too much in
common
> with m0n0 :)
> 
> Cheers,
> Malte
> 
> --
> [SGT] Simon G. Tatham: "How to Report Bugs Effectively"
>      <http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html>
> [ESR] Eric S. Raymond: "How To Ask Questions The Smart Way"
>      <http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
> For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
> 
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch