On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 02:28, Frank Cusack frank@cusack.net wrote:
On 6/30/10 6:11 PM -0400 Charles Marcus wrote:
That's just plain silly. Virtual users are extremely simple to setup, no need for MySQL unless you have a bunch.
I agree. I am always in favor of virtual users, it just gives you a lot more flexibility. I find system users MORE complicated to setup, actually. You have to worry about system security in addition to IMAP stuff. You always have to refactor things down the road and starting off with system users just makes it more unpleasant.
I find a system-user scheme more complicated only when there is not a one-to-one relationship between the system user base and the usernames in one domain. I tend to use a non-system-user scheme more, now, because of things like having different sets of users in different domains, where, if not now, possibly in the future, a LHS will conflict with a system user, meaning I have to map the relationships. In cases where there is one domain and LHS will be the same as the system user forever (about 3 to 5 years in internet time), I'll use system users (with role accounts either forwarded or as real system users, depending on need). Otherwise, the multi-domain, multi-user-set, all stored under one system user, scheme (that I don't like to call virtual because there is nothing virtual about it once you avoid thinking in terms of system users) works quite well. A hybrid, where one or more domains are designated for system users, could still coexist with the multi-domain scheme.