[Kroupware] Web interface frontend

[Andreas Jellinghaus]

hi Tobias

for systems, where total mail load is less than 100mbit:
 - first split servers by type: one for ldap, smtp, imap,...
   its easy to tell people "smtp server is smtp.company.com, 
   ldap server is ldap.company.com ... people already now that
   and can work with it. ok free/busy is different, but my webmail
   tool gives people a registry snippet, all they have to do is
   say "yes" to "do you want to merge this with the registry ?"
 - as long as your total load is < 100 mbit (or < 1gbit for gigabit
switches): have a proxy who does authenticate (saves the storage some
work), and knows the real storage server/acts as proxy. i think the
murder does that already, if not, there should be some implementations,
as people gave talks and told the audience, they do exactly that.)
 - for bigger systems: add a round robin dns before the proxy, or
   a load balancer. 
 - even bigger: no idea. 

but this will be > 100k users, so you should have the time and money
for a special design. for example implement it like martin suggested.

> What do you suggest for scaling to smaller installations? 
> Config-files at user's home-directory, individually created and personally 
> signed by the system administrator?
are we talking windows or linux ?
on linux the admin can fix it (on nfs managed home directories) with
perl scripts or the like. on windows its called group policy and works
quite well. for netscape etc. people can write a wizard (e.g. a fried
wrote a delphi app to ask simple questions, create the preferences
and then start netscape - that was in university with several k users
under windows where they had no home / could not permanently store
settings).

and there are lots of other approaches. maybe someone can gives us
details, how netscapes roaming profile exactly works? i saw it can be
save in http, ldap any maybe with other methods? didn't look at it so
far.


> It's the job of distributors and consultants to create some scripts who 
> organize this stuff. This provides scalability but especially security because 
> templates are a basic element to implement the security guideline of a 
> organization.

the usualy company is fine with smtp/ldap/imap.company.org, and a single
or several servers, and scalability as discussed.

communication is cheap, hardware is cheap, but finding good people is
hard. so i want to keep things simple, and i think the design i propose
is good.

after all, i know lots of company that have maybe no or maybe one
administrator. we both will agree, they want an easy installation,
minimal maintaince etc. and when they grow it's nice to have the
option of adding a few machines opposed to by very expensive hardware.

i think suse is selling tons of mail servers to this target group,
and i would like to see a completely free alternative.

> Developing a groupware solution that could be used by MS users as well 
> as by KDE-users does not mean copying their mad Exchange approach.

can you give details, where exchange is mad?

i can give some reasons:
 - it's based on x400. that hurts.
 - it implements everything! irc server? check. comic chat? check.
   nntp server? check. and so on.
 - it is everything. nice for people who need it, but unneeded 
   complexity for people who don't.
   (replication, sites, hierarchical organization, access control lists)
 - bad default configuration

i rely like to discuss where exchange is wrong. I'm mcse including an
exchange certification, and even though i never used it, this way i
learned a lot. i think stuff like sites should be avoided because of
its complexity footprint. but when you need it, i don't know any open
source software that offers these features. its the same with most
microsoft products IMO. 

but we better stop this before we create a flame war? It's not my
intention to do that. but i would love a real discussion, how we can
implement sites for those who need it, and keep
the design as simple as possible, so people can understand it, debug it
and solve problems easily.

andreas