From: Devdas Bhagat (no email)
Date: Fri Jul 20 2001 - 02:33:22 EDT
On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, Ken Murchison spewed into the ether:
> I haven't needed virtual domain support, and so I haven't thought about
> it much, but my first reaction is that simply changing the 'user.'
> prefix to 'domain.' is either going to be insufficient or will become a
> hack.
Its a start.
> First off, I applaud the effort. I know that many people would like to
> see this happen, so I'll try to help wherever I can. But the
> implementation needs to be clean and backwards compatible for it to have
> a chance of getting rolled into the main distribution.
Well, I'm trying for that.
> Off the top of my head, here are questions that I think would need to be
> answered:
>
> 1. Are all domains isolated from others, or do they get to see other
> domains folders?
All are isolated.
> 2. Public folders: do all domains share the same public area, or do they
> each have their own?
They will have their own.
> 3. If you simply change 'user.' to 'domain.', then what is the prefix
> for the Other User's namespace?
I didn't get this one.
Consider devdas at srt and devdas at brd
The corresponding mailboxes are:
srt.devdas
brd.devdas
> 4. How does this affect quotas, ACLs and seen state?
From my above exapmle, does this come into the question?
> My gut tells me that each domain (both personal folders and shared
> folders) should be isolated from each other. This means that there
> should be one more level of hierarchy above the current one, ie:
>
> domain.com/user/username
> domain.com/shared
> domain.net/user/username
> domain.net/shared
Ok, I'll try to get a temporary hack in for s/user/$domain, then see
if I can add another layer on top.
> I think creating this new structure might be a lot of work, and I can
> guarantee that the bulk of it will be getting LIST/LSUB correct.
Yup, this new structure is a problem, even though it will be ideal.
> On the flip side, I _think_ that the HIERSEP code will support usernames
> like '' without any changes, so that folders like
> 'user//Trash' would be allowed. This would mean that all
> domains would reside under the same umbrella and that the public folders
> would be shared amongst the domains. However, the personal folders for
> each domain could be kept in a separate Cyrus partition.
I couldn't get this at all. Some ASCII art please
Devdas Bhagat
-- Fred noticed his roommate had a black eye upon returning from a dance. "What happened?" "I was struck by the beauty of the place."
|
|
|