[Gllug] Email provider

[T Menezes]

Apologies for the repeated postings. My original replies finally made it to
the mailing list after I assumed they had gone into the ether (I've been
having mail trouble) and used another email account to post my comments.

TM

On 6 April 2011 09:52, <gllug-request at gllug.org.uk> wrote:

> Send Gllug mailing list submissions to
>        gllug at gllug.org.uk
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        gllug-request at gllug.org.uk
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        gllug-owner at gllug.org.uk
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Gllug digest..."
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: Email provider (T Menezes)
>   2. Optimizing Linux for SSD usage (Narender)
>   3. Re: Small form factor backup machine (Bob Giles)
>   4. Re: Email provider (Neil Macvicar)
>   5. Getting required  read / write / access permissions (Chris Bell)
>   6. Re: Email provider (Henrik Morsing)
>   7. Re: Email provider (Martyn Drake)
>   8. Re: Getting required  read / write / access permissions
>      (Bruce Richardson)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: T Menezes <t.menezes at tm.uklinux.net>
> To: Greater London Linux User Group <gllug at gllug.org.uk>
> Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2011 13:14:18 +0100
> Subject: Re: [Gllug] Email provider
> On 19:59, James Hawtin wrote:
>
>> As a someone with multiple domain I might also agree with you however the
>> OP did not state if they were looking for person email, or a system for
>> handling email from a domain. Without knowing this important detail, it is
>> difficult to target the advice. Perhaps the OP can tell us what kind of
>> email access they are looking for. Personally I like the Linux VPS solution,
>> however I have Be at home with a static IP address to roll my own from there
>> at the moment, I will probably move to a VPS if this proves unstable,
>> however I like my current setup of OpenBSD spamd grey trap, is there an
>> equivent to this for linux?
>>
>> James
>>
>
> Sorry, I forgot to add that I am looking email for my own and my wife's
> personal use. And also for my wife's private (small) business.
> Cheers
> TM
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Narender <narender.hooda at gmail.com>
> To: Greater London Linux User Group <gllug at gllug.org.uk>
> Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 08:49:11 +0530
> Subject: [Gllug] Optimizing Linux for SSD usage
> Hi
>
> I thought this was interesting.
>
>
> http://searchenterpriselinux.techtarget.com/tip/Optimizing-Linux-for-SSD-usage?asrc=EM_NLN_13599320&track=NL-795&ad=824889
>
>
> >>Does EXT 4 has features suited for SSD or EXT 3 would also work well?
>
> Even newer gen spindle hard drives start to use larger disk blocks so
> that partition need to be on the boundary to get best perf. Latest gen
> OS should all take care of that. I personally tried windows 7 and
> Ubuntu 10 to partition and then dump the partition table and double
> check the boundary.
>
>
> >> we are using CenOS5.3 (64 bit ) in our production. could someone please
> give pointer about what version of centos we should put on it.
>
>
> Best Regards
>
> --N
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Bob Giles <thecorfiot at gmail.com>
> To: Greater London Linux User Group <gllug at gllug.org.uk>
> Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 09:20:22 +0300
> Subject: Re: [Gllug] Small form factor backup machine
>  On 06/04/11 03:41, j.roberts wrote:
>
> ==================Snip=================
>
> - the deal we used ended 31/3 but some have said now extended?
>
>  ==================Snip=================
>
>
> Extended to 30th April.
>
>
> http://h41112.www4.hp.com/promo/proliantmicroserver/index.html?jumpid=ex_r135_uk/en/smb/tsg/go_proliantmicroserver
>
> Bob G.
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Neil Macvicar <neilm at kernelspace.co.uk>
> To: Greater London Linux User Group <gllug at gllug.org.uk>
> Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 09:34:48 +0100 (BST)
> Subject: Re: [Gllug] Email provider
> I provide email services direct (no reselling) to companies and individuals
> - if I can be of assistance drop me an email off-list.
>
> Thanks,
> --Neil.
>
> Neil Macvicar, Managing Director.
> Tel: +44(0 )203 384 3323
> Web: http://www.kernelspace.co.uk
>
> Kernelspace Ltd. Registered Office: 25 Harbour Reach, Imperial Wharf,
> London SW6 2SS.
> Company Number: 06734887. Incorporated in England & Wales.
>
> This email and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended
> recipients(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential
> information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied,
> disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an
> intended recipient then please promptly delete this email and any attachment
> and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "T Menezes" <t.menezes at tm.uklinux.net>
> To: gllug at gllug.org.uk
> Sent: Tuesday, 5 April, 2011 12:38:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [Gllug] Email provider
>
> Hi,
>
> > It would help if you said what you expect the email provider to do
> > for you.
> > Eg: mail available via IMAP/POP3, or a webmail interface, ....
>
> IMAP is good, POP3 is acceptable, and webmail is a nice-to-have.
>
> What is really important to me is that the service is reliable and as
> much 'future proof' (if any such thing exists) as possible: meaning I
> don't like the idea of having to change my email address simply because
> I am changing who provides that service.
>
> > If you don't have a domain name you might as well go for a generic
> > account like hotmail, gmail or yahoo. If you do have a domain name,
> > most registry services will provide an email server as a bolt on to
> > that domain name, that would be a good place to start.
>
> I don't want to simply get my email from my broadband provider because
> (usually) the name of the provider features in your email address and it
> becomes a total hassle to swap providers.
>
> As I said, I'll contemplate going with gmail if I have to. But, I was
> thinking of getting my own domain and piggy-backing the email on it.
>
> The thing is, I have never done this before and I don't know a) how to
> go about doing it; b) good service providers; and c) what the potential
> gotchas are.
>
> At this point in time I don't have the resources to run the email server
> from home, so I need to purchase the service from someone.
>
> Thanks for your help
> TM
> --
> Gllug mailing list - Gllug at gllug.org.uk
> http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Chris Bell <chrisbell at chrisbell.org.uk>
> To: GLLUG List <gllug at gllug.org.uk>
> Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 09:40:04 +0100 (BST)
> Subject: [Gllug] Getting required read / write / access permissions
> Hello,
>   I am trying to get the correct access permissions automatically for a
> number of users accessing a server running Debian Lenny at present, with
> all
> users accessing the server from Microsoft PCs via Samba. The requirements
> are personal home directories with R/W access only by the owner, a
> directory
> with full recursive R/W access to all files to all, but only all, on a
> restricted list, plus a directory with full recursive R/W access to all
> listed users. Individual users need to be able to create sub-directories
> and
> new files. Some users also need access from their normal computers via
> OpenVPN. It would be best if shared files can not be deleted once created.
>   I have created two additional groups (not users), one restricted, the
> other to include all. I have edited /etc/samba/smb.conf to set access
> permissions to 770 on each of the directories, together with the required
> user lists for each. If I look at man chmod I see that I can specify 770
> but
> there are six possible attributes, rwxXst, and when I use ls -al I only see
> three.
>   I am still being told that not all the required users have write access
> to all neccessary new files. Have I missed something? Would Microsoft
> limited access permissions over-ride those set by Samba?
>
>
> --
> Chris Bell www.chrisbell.org.uk (was www.overview.demon.co.uk)
> Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house.
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: henrik at morsing.cc (Henrik Morsing)
> To: Greater London Linux User Group <gllug at gllug.org.uk>
> Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 09:55:51 +0100
> Subject: Re: [Gllug] Email provider
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 09:12:24AM +0100, t.clarke wrote:
> > Just a small query about DNS entries -
> > am I correct in understanding that a reverse DNS entry
> (.........inaddr.arpa)
> > still has to be set up by your ISP irrespective of who you use for the
> 'normal'
> > DNS ??
>
> Yes, they do, but that should already be there if it's a half-decent ISP.
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Martyn Drake <martyn at drake.org.uk>
> To: Greater London Linux User Group <gllug at gllug.org.uk>
> Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 09:57:43 +0100
> Subject: Re: [Gllug] Email provider
> On 6 April 2011 09:55, Henrik Morsing <henrik at morsing.cc> wrote:
>
> > Yes, they do, but that should already be there if it's a half-decent ISP.
>
> Absolutely - and even better - will allow you to change that reverse
> DNS accordingly at whim.  We do - all done through our control panel.
>
> Regards,
>
> Martyn
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Bruce Richardson <itsbruce at workshy.org>
> To: gllug at gllug.org.uk
> Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 10:00:18 +0100
> Subject: Re: [Gllug] Getting required read / write / access permissions
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 09:40:04AM +0100, Chris Bell wrote:
> > Hello,
> >    I am trying to get the correct access permissions automatically for a
> > number of users accessing a server running Debian Lenny at present, with
> all
> > users accessing the server from Microsoft PCs via Samba. The requirements
> > are personal home directories with R/W access only by the owner,
>
> Very simple and standard to create in samba.  The example configs should
> be sufficient.
>
> > a directory
> > with full recursive R/W access to all files to all, but only all, on a
> > restricted list, plus a directory with full recursive R/W access to all
> > listed users.
>
> Are these to be separate shares or two directories on the same share?
> If the latter, then POSIX acls are possibly the best tool.
>
> > Individual users need to be able to create sub-directories and
> > new files. [ snip ] It would be best if shared files can not be
> > deleted once created.
>
> That last bit is simply not possible.  If users have sufficient
> permissions to create files, they have sufficient to delete them.  It is
> possible to set up a situation where users can modify the contents of
> files but not create, rename or delete them but that's very little use
> in real life.
>
> > Some users also need access from their normal computers via
> > OpenVPN.
>
> That doesn't make much sense.  OpenVPN gives people access to a network,
> not to a computer's files.  How are the OpenVPN users going to be
> accessing the files after they have gained access to the network via
> OpenVPN?
>
> >    I have created two additional groups (not users), one restricted, the
> > other to include all. I have edited /etc/samba/smb.conf to set access
> > permissions to 770 on each of the directories, together with the required
> > user lists for each.
>
> Can you post the relevant parts of smb.conf?  Anything relating to
> access permissions in the global config, plus the share sections.
>
> > If I look at man chmod I see that I can specify 770 but
> > there are six possible attributes, rwxXst, and when I use ls -al I only
> see
> > three.
>
> I think you need to read up on Unix file permissions and then re-read
> the chmod man page.
>
> http://www.zzee.com/solutions/unix-permissions.shtml
>
> >    I am still being told that not all the required users have write
> access
> > to all neccessary new files. Have I missed something? Would Microsoft
> > limited access permissions over-ride those set by Samba?
>
> Too little information.  That would need to be looked at on a case by
> case basis, eliminating problems as they are discovered, till there are
> no more problems.
>
>
> --
> Bruce
>
> Get thee behind me, Stan: for it is written, thou hast gotten me into
> another fine mess.  -- Oliver 4:8
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAk2cK6IACgkQtkVqYTMBSwEdkACeNkyC3r87v8naXifDdxsh9lLK
> ILsAn0OGKzjS3+pOxCjC1ZDT8hRqctWO
> =oIxu
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
> http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/gllug/attachments/20110406/f47cb6a0/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
--
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug