@scottalanmiller said in MailCow in Production Datacenter:
Docker is truly terrible here, IMHO. So much unnecessary complexity. But at least it is working.
Basically, no other choice bit to "accept" Docker! (in this use case).
Is it good enough for you guys to ditch Zimbra & switch?
@scottalanmiller said in MailCow in Production Datacenter:
@FATeknollogee said in MailCow in Production Datacenter:
@scottalanmiller said in MailCow in Production Datacenter:
@scottalanmiller said in MailCow in Production Datacenter:
Great, glad to hear that that works. I'll be testing it more once I see if it comes up at all. The first time it didn't at all, so you are two steps farther than we got
Been a while, and now it is a different project. This time for a customer. But we have MailCow up and running now and behind an Nginx proxy in a datacenter. Working great so far.
Using Docker?
Is there any other way? MailCow appears to be 100% dependent on Docker.
I don't know of any other way which is why I asked!
Previously, we had that forum discussion & I thought the general consensus was Docker for this use case wasn't a great idea?
@scottalanmiller said in MailCow in Production Datacenter:
@scottalanmiller said in MailCow in Production Datacenter:
Great, glad to hear that that works. I'll be testing it more once I see if it comes up at all. The first time it didn't at all, so you are two steps farther than we got
Been a while, and now it is a different project. This time for a customer. But we have MailCow up and running now and behind an Nginx proxy in a datacenter. Working great so far.
Using Docker?
Not to pile on or threadjack.
@Skyetel support is in my Top 3 of all IT related type support.
These folks are good.
@Pete-S said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:
@FATeknollogee
I did a test. I get 840 Mbps IPsec between two servers running xcp-ng and one pfSense in each. 4 vCPU 2.5GHz Xeon E5.
This was over 1GbE and with NAT, packet filtering, I/O overhead of Xen etc.I expected more but was too lazy to try on bare metal. But I would assume it's faster, also a newer CPU with higher clock frequencies would likely give it another boost.
If you want a lot more speed you can add an accelerator card. Intel has their Quick Assist Technology and a card that can do up to 50 Gbps is priced around $650.
How much RAM?
Did you check CPU usage?
@Pete-S pfSense? What did you test with?
@scottalanmiller said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:
It's always a bad idea to ask a vendor a question like this. Always.
If I chose to go this route, I def wouldn't use their appliance.
My question for them would be: what hardware & encryption levels are needed to achieve 500+ Mbps?
@JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:
...pfSense, or TNSR. Just don't use OpenVPN. Use IPSEC.
Yep, heard that a few times...no OpenVPN.
pfSense + TNSR sounds interesting, just not sure if it's worth the "hassle" procuring my own hardware (which really isn't a big deal) vs ER4.
It's probably not a bad idea to at least speak w the pfSense folks.
@JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:
So you are making a tunnel for a tunnel.
I guess you could call it that!
WTF are you pushing over RDP that needs 400mbps?
I'm just trying to take advantage of the solid connections at both ends
You should have no need for those speeds.
