Carrier class email security recommendation

todd glassey tglassey at earthlink.net
Mon Apr 12 09:09:12 CDT 2010


On 4/12/2010 2:49 AM, Alex Kamiru wrote:
> I am in the process of sourcing for a carrier class email security
> solution that will replace our current edge spam gateways based on open
> source solutions. Some solutions that am currently considering are
> Ironport, Fortinet Fortimail, MailFoundry and Barracuda. I'd therefore
> wish to know, based on your experiences, what works for you
> satisfactorily. 


> Areas that are key for me are centralized management and
> reporting, carrier class performance, per mailbox policy and quarantine,
> and favourable licensing for an MSSP. I know Ironport is rated highly in
> this space but I find its per user licensing is not favourable for a
> MSSP. 

On the other hand installing a FreeBSD system with QMail/Procmail and/or
PostFIX for the other stuff is a no-brainer especially with a Webmin
Management front end.

> 
> Regards,
> Alex.
> 

Alex there are many email systems out there - but make sure that
whatever you buy can support NTPv4 and not SNTP or unauthenticated NTP
since this is how the GW is going to be able to put time-marks on
receipts which must have legal authority.

So that means any appliance system provider must have at least NTPv4
tested with both Autokey and symmetric-key and the new interface
specific ACL's in the 4.2.6 versions of NTP. Further the issues of the
ECC/Parity memory become important here because time is moved over UDP
and is subject to single-bit errors all over the place.

Todd Glassey
> 
> 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: tglassey.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 125 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20100412/350192fe/attachment.vcf>


More information about the NANOG mailing list