Unique IP for each domain, hundreds, brings ASSP down

[shdjsahwkjq ehwq kehwkq h]

I am posting this on behalf of a friend who is just trying to get ASSP  
running.  His email server is set in a way that each domain is NOT  
multi-homed to one IP.

This means, that
domainA has MX for 123.123.122.100
domainB has MX for 123.123.122.101
domainC has MX for 123.123.122.102
domainD has MX for 123.123.122.103

And so on and so forth, up to I believe, many hundreds, if not over a  
thousand, of these cases are running on the MTA.  This is so that his  
users can enter in "username" in their email clients, and not  
username@domainA.

Sort of like the old days of http, where there was no host: header, so  
every single website needed an IP of it's own.

When ASSP was turned on, a quad-core Xeon with 8GB of RAM, it came to  
a halt, stopped delivering mail.  I believe this setup means that ASSP  
is going to need to open a multiple sockets for each IP, so he has to  
set 123.123.122.100:10025 or whatever port.  This is on OS X, and I  
know OS X already does not like to open too many connections by  
default to begin with, but his current email server handles this setup  
with no trouble at all, and is a pretty normal feature of any email  
server, if you so desire to route email this way.

Is this too much for ASSP, or is there something fundamentally wrong  
in how he is setting this up that I am overlooking in trying to help?

Here is the start of the log, which looks fine to me, other than I may  
suggest he downgrade to the official release:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/340087/Drops/11.07.09/assp_log_initial-743e7978-175705.txt

--
Scott * If you contact me off list replace talklists@ with scott@ *


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test

[Маллиндайн Стивен (Steve Mallindine)]

Scott,

Not wishing to sound rude, but your friend seems to be going around  
this the wrong way.

"thousands of domain names and ip's"??? The administration overhead  
just to save the user adding "@domain" in the client doesn't seem  
jusitifiable... unless there's another reason to do it that way...

Just MHO

Steve

Sent from my iPhone

On 08.11.2009, at 5:03, "Scott Haneda" <talklists@...> wrote:

> I am posting this on behalf of a friend who is just trying to get ASSP
> running.  His email server is set in a way that each domain is NOT
> multi-homed to one IP.
>
> This means, that
> domainA has MX for 123.123.122.100
> domainB has MX for 123.123.122.101
> domainC has MX for 123.123.122.102
> domainD has MX for 123.123.122.103
>
> And so on and so forth, up to I believe, many hundreds, if not over a
> thousand, of these cases are running on the MTA.  This is so that his
> users can enter in "username" in their email clients, and not
> username@domainA.
>
> Sort of like the old days of http, where there was no host: header, so
> every single website needed an IP of it's own.
>
> When ASSP was turned on, a quad-core Xeon with 8GB of RAM, it came to
> a halt, stopped delivering mail.  I believe this setup means that ASSP
> is going to need to open a multiple sockets for each IP, so he has to
> set 123.123.122.100:10025 or whatever port.  This is on OS X, and I
> know OS X already does not like to open too many connections by
> default to begin with, but his current email server handles this setup
> with no trouble at all, and is a pretty normal feature of any email
> server, if you so desire to route email this way.
>
> Is this too much for ASSP, or is there something fundamentally wrong
> in how he is setting this up that I am overlooking in trying to help?
>
> Here is the start of the log, which looks fine to me, other than I may
> suggest he downgrade to the official release:
> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/340087/Drops/11.07.09/assp_log_initial-743e7978-175705.txt
>
> --
> Scott * If you contact me off list replace talklists@ with scott@ *
>
>
> ---
> ---
> ---
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008  
> 30-Day
> trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and  
> focus on
> what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
> Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
> _______________________________________________
> Assp-test mailing list
> Assp-test@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test

[shdjsahwkjq ehwq kehwkq h]

I agree, but that is how it is, and if there are 1000 domains, and say  
only 5 users per domain, you are looking at asking 5000+ people to  
change their email client settings.

Even still, ASSP should be able to handle it with no trouble, the  
email server does now, with the load of POP and IMAP, and this is  
significant hardware no less.

Thanks for the comments.
--
Scott * If you contact me off list replace talklists@ with scott@ *

On Nov 7, 2009, at 9:32 PM, Маллиндайн Стивен (Steve  
Mallindine) wrote:

> Scott,
>
> Not wishing to sound rude, but your friend seems to be going around
> this the wrong way.
>
> "thousands of domain names and ip's"??? The administration overhead
> just to save the user adding "@domain" in the client doesn't seem
> jusitifiable... unless there's another reason to do it that way...
>
> Just MHO
>
> Steve
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 08.11.2009, at 5:03, "Scott Haneda" <talklists@...> wrote:
>
>> I am posting this on behalf of a friend who is just trying to get  
>> ASSP
>> running.  His email server is set in a way that each domain is NOT
>> multi-homed to one IP.
>>
>> This means, that
>> domainA has MX for 123.123.122.100
>> domainB has MX for 123.123.122.101
>> domainC has MX for 123.123.122.102
>> domainD has MX for 123.123.122.103
>>
>> And so on and so forth, up to I believe, many hundreds, if not over a
>> thousand, of these cases are running on the MTA.  This is so that his
>> users can enter in "username" in their email clients, and not
>> username@domainA.
>>
>> Sort of like the old days of http, where there was no host: header,  
>> so
>> every single website needed an IP of it's own.
>>
>> When ASSP was turned on, a quad-core Xeon with 8GB of RAM, it came to
>> a halt, stopped delivering mail.  I believe this setup means that  
>> ASSP
>> is going to need to open a multiple sockets for each IP, so he has to
>> set 123.123.122.100:10025 or whatever port.  This is on OS X, and I
>> know OS X already does not like to open too many connections by
>> default to begin with, but his current email server handles this  
>> setup
>> with no trouble at all, and is a pretty normal feature of any email
>> server, if you so desire to route email this way.
>>
>> Is this too much for ASSP, or is there something fundamentally wrong
>> in how he is setting this up that I am overlooking in trying to help?
>>
>> Here is the start of the log, which looks fine to me, other than I  
>> may
>> suggest he downgrade to the official release:
>> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/340087/Drops/11.07.09/assp_log_initial-743e7978-175705.txt
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test

[paul+as]

On 7 Nov 2009 at 17:59, Scott Haneda wrote:

> I am posting this on behalf of a friend who is just trying to get ASSP  
> running.  His email server is set in a way that each domain is NOT  
> multi-homed to one IP.
>
> This means, that
> domainA has MX for 123.123.122.100
> domainB has MX for 123.123.122.101
> domainC has MX for 123.123.122.102
> domainD has MX for 123.123.122.103
>
> And so on and so forth, up to I believe, many hundreds, if not over a  
> thousand, of these cases are running on the MTA.  This is so that his  
> users can enter in "username" in their email clients, and not  
> username@domainA.

Are these just internal addresses?  How can you look up the MX record
without the domain names?

I think your friend has greater config problems than just ASSP!

paul


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test