mailserver using dfbsd

[Ferruccio Zamuner]

Thank Matthew Dillon, Bill Hacker, Geert Hendrickx to reply to my out of topic question:
As they should be. Most alternatives are more effective and don't need the overhead OR the DB of 
greylisting.
                 Bill

:Run an *SQL server on either host (or
:on a dedicated third one) and let both mailservers use/maintain the same
:database over the network.
:
:	Geert
If you don't like pulling a greylist once an hour or once a minute or 
however, then just push live updates with a UDP broadcast and do a lazy
synchronization to catch anything that was missed.

If you want things to run efficiently, each SMTP processing host needs
to operate independantly.  Otherwise any failure can bottleneck the
entire system.  Having a single data server can and will bottleneck
the system as well as create a single point of failure.  It's a really
bad idea.  Keep it simple and design the system robustly.
					-Matt
Of course greylist is not the only available antispam weapon, but it's a valuable piece
(I like mailtraps, honeypot, milters, blacklists, spf, regex, domainnamekeys while I don't like bayesian filters and everything that makes false positives).
I was asking if there was already in dfbsd something to share a fs or some memories in a fault
tollerant way where to store shared data. 
I agree that live update via UDP broadcast is probably the better and portable solution for
greylist data.

I'll look forward about next your cluster effort and ZFS implementation.

Have fun,              \fer