> > I'd say it's the better choice for large-scale deployments with > > tens and hundreds of thousands of users. > Cyrus does not require creating users on the mail server which I > have always believed is a big security plus. +1 Cyrus having its own identity management has been a big plus; the server as kind of a service-sandbox. > > > I use Cyrus because Dovecot did not excist at the time I wanted > > > to go away from Washington IMAP. > > I'm in the same boat. > The same kind of thing for me because there was not much around in > the late 90's in the way of IMAP servers. Same here. I migrated from UW l-o-n-g ago as UW so desperately struggled with large mailboxes. > > Right, but for a new deployment I would at least consider Dovecot. > > I've never administrated a Dovecot server, but it is definitely > > much easier to set up than Cyrus. > I am not so sure about that now. Agree [but, honestly, I've never understood the cyrus-is-complicated bit]. Cyrus is self-contained, which makes it much easier to administer. > I believe Cyrus was designed to solve the mailstore problem at scale > from the outset. This. -- Meetings Coordinator, Michigan Association of Railroad Passengers 537 Shirley St NE Grand Rapids, MI 49503-1754 Phone: 616.581.8010 E-mail: awilliam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx GPG#D95ED383 Web: http://www.marp.org ---- Cyrus Home Page: http://www.cyrusimap.org/ List Archives/Info: http://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/pipermail/info-cyrus/ To Unsubscribe: https://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/mailman/listinfo/info-cyrus
