Connect. Communicate. Collaborate. Securely.

Home » Kerio User Forums » Kerio Connect » Two simple questions - New to Kerio
  •  
gippynet

Messages: 4
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
Well I hope.

First of all I love the simple install process we saw during a test install on a test Redhat Enterprise v4 box here. The webmail interface is tops, and so many other little things we think will work well for us, but...

1) While setting up a 2nd domain for testing, provided a user administration for that domain, we did not notice a way as the server administrators to lock down a domain wide quota size for user accounts. We don't want a sub-administrator to be able to give Joe over there 2 gigs of space if we only want everyone to have 250 meg accounts. Please tell me there is a way to limit what a domain administrator can set a specific user account to. You can limit them to the number of accounts, but not the max size of an account? Maybe we missed it :)

2) Please don't tell us the usage of NAS or iSCSI devices is not an option? You guys have one of the nicest interfaces I have seen, you support so many nice, advanced options, yet we can't store our users email on an already existing Network Appliance NAS array?!? Please say it isn't so! NFS, we have been able to do NFS storage with Communigate Pro (and other mail servers) for years, but have tired of their focus on things like SIP instead of very cool advances in webmail administration among other things...

Hoping for some possibly good news on both of these before we have to drop the thought of buying 4 or 5,000 user licensing completely...

Thanks.
  •  
Kerio_jthomas

Messages: 511
Karma: 1
Send a private message to this user
Hi.

1) Yes, that's correct. There is no per-domain quota setting. It's a feature suggestion we have at the moment, but I don't have any idea when it will be implemented.

2) We have only a few customers using a NAS or SAN device. I don't recommend you to use one - the KMS file access and writing system has not been designed for across-the-network. I also strongly advise against NFS for the same reasons. If you call us because it doesn't work, we'll almost certainly tell you to switch to a local drive as the first test.

Better NAS/SAN/NFS support is a long-term feature goal.

Cheers,
Joshua

Joshua Thomas
Technical Support Manager
2350 Mission College Blvd, Suite 400
Santa Clara, CA 95054
Phone: (408) 496-4500
Fax: (408) 496-6902
http://www.kerio.com/support.html

  •  
gippynet

Messages: 4
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
1) Hmmm thats just too bad. We are use to the lack of a domain quota, but with the ability to limit the number of accounts that can be setup in a domain, and a sub-admin can't create more accounts than that, having a domain "default" storage per account limit, or forcing them to use one of a preset user template without modification unless they are the server admin users would do the same thing and probably likely easier than domain quota, would require to just limit a per account storage as you already can do that, just need to keep the domain admin from modifying the setting.

2) This is too bad really. High quality central storage systems which are enterprise grade, highly redundant systems are lower priced and easily available to small/med. businesses today more than ever. Both Netapp and EMC as examples have very high capacity/high drive i/o devices starting at lower prices then a few thousand accounts in Kerio with features and functions you simply can't get with internal storage. Things like higher file i/o numbers (more drives) then you can squeeze into a single server, OS independent dynamic volume resizing and with better use of resource dollars than buying limited use DAS boxes.

Both of these are a shame, I swear your product is higher quality than any other product we have looked at (we have looked at a lot recently), easier to use, and the end-user interface is just simply top notch, but without the ability to limit the storage used by a specific domain (at the domain level or better a quota limit at the individual account/# of accounts level in a domain set by the server admin, not domain admin), its not usable in our environment, and not really interested in purchasing a minimum of a 6 drive RAID enabled server when we already have high quality, fast NAS storage devices that can out perform and out feature a integrated "server" solution. With more even small/med. businesses looking at server virtualization, storage virtualization, and prices on these once super pricey enterprise only devices coming down to the affordable price range, you guys may want to look into this sooner than later..

Thank you for the quick answers though! I guess we are off on our search again for another product...
  •  
jshaw541

Messages: 471
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
gippynet wrote on Tue, 25 April 2006 07:58

1) Hmmm thats just too bad. We are use to the lack of a domain quota, but with the ability to limit the number of accounts that can be setup in a domain, and a sub-admin can't create more accounts than that, having a domain "default" storage per account limit, or forcing them to use one of a preset user template without modification unless they are the server admin users would do the same thing and probably likely easier than domain quota, would require to just limit a per account storage as you already can do that, just need to keep the domain admin from modifying the setting.



If you're feeding off an Active Directory or Open Directory domain, quota values are held inside the LDAP database and you can easily script this.

My organization is Active Directory-based and I scripted domain-wide (actually OU-wide) quotas.


Kerio MailServer 6.7.1 w/AD
Windows Server 2003 SP 1
Dell PowerEdge 2850 (Dual Xeon 3.2ghz and 2 GB RAM)
~1300 users
~1000+ concurrent IMAPS connections
iPhone users
Outlook 2007 KOFF users
Apple iCal 10.5/10.6 users
  •  
gippynet

Messages: 4
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
No we are not, but that defeats the purpose of having the ability to limit a specific domain in the email server to say 15 email accounts, and the domain sub-administrator can't override that, but you simply can't type in a box "limit each of those email accounts to a default of x MB/GB" Every email server product we have evaluated has that rather basic function when it comes to domain level administration limits.

Just noticed that a domain administrator can override the server administrators setting for largest file attachement size a user can send as well.

I guess I am just not sure what the purpose of having some limits the server admin can limit the domain admin from changing, ie: accounts that can be setup, but the server admin can't lock down some rather important things like storage per each of those accounts, or the max attachement size. Domain level administrators should never be able to override limits put in place by the overall server administrator, just like you would never want a user to be able to override their quota set by the server and/or the domain adminstrator.

As a side note, it would be great if a domain administrator saw a total storage used right under the total number of accounts out of the domain limit of accounts, instead of having to visit each user in the domain to find out what total storage usage for the domain is.

Not to say an AD way would not work well in many cases, just seems it would make more sense to have the quota limit which already exists per user, be limited based on a default the server administrator can set when giving access to a domain administrator (again just like the limit of number of domains).

Sorry to be nit-picking on some of these points, but these are just things available on other products in this market, and so far except for the limitation of what the server administrator can limit the domain administrator from doing/changing at the account level (ie: quotas and file attachement size are the two biggies for us) and while disappointing the lack of NAS/SAN support is something of course that can be worked around. In our environment the lack of the administration lockdown is the killer.

Thank you for the idea/thought though :)
  •  
Kerio_jthomas

Messages: 511
Karma: 1
Send a private message to this user
Thanks for the compliments. Strong quality in the interface was one of the areas we focused on early in the design of the product.

I'd like to get those features you want, too; but first we're trying to build an offline mode, which you may not have noticed we also lack =)

I'd rather have you find another product than waste your time with ours and be unhappy. Good luck in your search.

-Joshua


gippynet wrote on Tue, 25 April 2006 07:58



Both of these are a shame, I swear your product is higher quality than any other product we have looked at (we have looked at a lot recently), easier to use, and the end-user interface is just simply top notch, but without the ability to limit the storage used by a specific domain (at the domain level or better a quota limit at the individual account/# of accounts level in a domain set by the server admin, not domain admin), its not usable in our environment, and not really interested in purchasing a minimum of a 6 drive RAID enabled server when we already have high quality, fast NAS storage devices that can out perform and out feature a integrated "server" solution. With more even small/med. businesses looking at server virtualization, storage virtualization, and prices on these once super pricey enterprise only devices coming down to the affordable price range, you guys may want to look into this sooner than later..

Thank you for the quick answers though! I guess we are off on our search again for another product...


Joshua Thomas
Technical Support Manager
2350 Mission College Blvd, Suite 400
Santa Clara, CA 95054
Phone: (408) 496-4500
Fax: (408) 496-6902
http://www.kerio.com/support.html

  •  
gippynet

Messages: 4
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
Actually more interested in strong POP3/IMAP/SMTP/Webmail than Outlook connection, and as your calendar/shared contacts/etc stuff is so strong on the webmail side it would cover 95%+ of our needs. Also the quick and informative support here is a big plus as well.

hahah its just so close I can taste it, and again just a few small things out of so many great things it just hurts ;)

We are still searching, but will keep an eye here to see if the issues around the quota lockdown for domain admins is addresses sometime in the next 3 to 6 months (I can hope), again the NAS/SAN stuff would be very nice too, but is not a deal breaker if it looks like long term you guys would be investigating it.

Thank you again.
Previous Topic: What's the preferred Windows OS for KMS?
Next Topic: Kerio Outlook Connector and 2 accounts
Goto Forum:
  


Disclaimer:
Kerio discussion forums are intended for open communication between forum members and may contain information and material posted by members which may be useful in learning about Kerio products. The discussion forums are not intended to provide technical support for any specific product. Any information implied or expressed in the discussion forums is that of the posting member. Kerio is in no way responsible for the information posted in the forums, or its accuracy. Kerio employees may participate in the discussions, but their postings do not represent an offical position of the company on any issues raised or discussed. Kerio reserves the right to monitor and maintain the forums to promote free and accurate exchange of information.

Current Time: Sat Nov 18 20:35:34 CET 2017

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00445 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.
Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.4.