IMAP in house or other?

Corey Edwards tensai at
Wed Jun 7 09:20:09 MDT 2006

On Tue, 2006-06-06 at 19:56 -0600, Steve wrote:
> What we need is to either implement an "in house" IMAP server or go
> with a hosted solution.  Since this is the first time I have ever been
> in a predicament like this I was hoping someone who has been at a
> similar crossroads could do a post mortem on the decision that was
> made when they went down this path.

IMAP is a piece of cake. You'll probably have far more issues with the
SMTP server you'll also have to run. Neither of the two I find to be too
difficult, but that is what I do. I've been on both sides of the coin
and both solutions are workable.

Benefits of in-house:

        * speedy access not limited by Internet bandwidth
        * customization
        * disk quotas limited only by your hardware

Benefits of hosted:

        * 24x7 support by somebody else
        * no hardware/software worries

Basically the question is, do you want to worry about hardware outages
at 2am? Do you have the capabilities to manage it if your admin is on
vacation? If yes, then I'd go hosted. Otherwise, let somebody else worry
about it.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : 

More information about the PLUG mailing list