Slashdot Mirror


Best Way to Handle Email for a Small Domain?

CorkBobbingInTheSeaOfLife asks: "Our company just had its bi-annual email crisis/outage, so my boss wants to try something new -- to give me the 'opportunity' to figure out and implement a better way to host our small domain's email. We've changed hosts a few times, but whether we spend a little money or a lot none have been as reliable as we've liked -- companies fold, get blacklisted by AOL, and so forth. Is there a way to be smart about this, without hiring a dedicated email server pro? Do reliable email hosts actually exist? Should we run 'email appliance' software (such as ClarkConnect or E-Smith) on our own server? I'd appreciate any tips here - hell hath no fury like people without email, and I am very afraid..."

3 of 126 comments (clear)

  1. A few options by j-turkey · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As outlined in earlier posts, you have quite a few options when it comes to email service.

    You can have it hosted. This is probably the easiest option. It sounds like you've had some bad experiences with this, and may be wary of it. You will have the best luck going with larger, more established hosts that embrace modern technology and have a strong, well documented, and well enforced AUP (that bans all kinds of spamming).

    The second option has also been mentioned. Run a small Unix-based email service out of your office. This is probably the cheapest option, and depending on whom you compare it to, day-to-day management and troubleshooting can be quicker than a hosted service.

    The third option is going to be an unpopular one with the Slashdot crowd (and in some cases, understandably so). Check out Microsoft Exchange (try the one bundled with Small Business Server). There are other groupware applications out there, and some (like Novell/SUSE's OpenExchange) are worth consideration...but nothing is Exchange. If you're already a Microsoft shop, you should definitely consider it as it integrates well with the MSFT software that you already have. Of course, it's budget dependant (and is an expensive platform to use). In your case with a small shop and limited experience, I would have a third party come in and set it up for you, and sign up for a service contract.

    For an end user (especially management types), Exchange has every feature under the sun. It would help if you identified your goals (specifically budget and featureset desired) and then decide on what product is best for you. However, I would advise you to leave no option off the table, even if you have personal issues with the software. Also, all of these options are available as hosted solutions. However, it's important to weigh out both the benefits and drawbacks to hosting. Benefits are relatively obvious, and some drawbacks are that you lose control over your service, and certain quick tasks (like a password change) can take hours or even a full day for them to get around to.

    --

    -Turkey

  2. No mention of Mac OS X Server yet? by blindseer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Look into what Apple has to offer. Mac OS X Server looks very nice. It will run on anything from an old iMac to a Xserve G5. It features spam filtering, web mail, anti-virus, and encrypted connections.

    I haven't used Apple's server products since the days of Mac OS 9. I'm just a fan of their products.

    --
    I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
  3. Re:What about Microsoft Exchange? by kayen_telva · · Score: 3, Interesting

    exchange is only useful if you need the shared calendaring/scheduling/etc that it provides.
    otherwise, a linux box running courier-imap, your choice of webmail interface, and exim/postfix/etc is going to be a LOT cheaper
    and the free solution does not have the artificial 16gb limit on storage (soon to be 75)
    outlook works wonderfully with courier-imap.
    just make sure you have a REALLY nice battery backup on all parts of the wan connection and the email server so when the lights go out, the mail keeps flowing...and a backup MX record too