similar to: Upgrading a dovecot director configuration?

> On 6 May 2018, at 8.46, Niels Kobsch?tzki <niels at kobschaetzki.net> wrote: > > Hi, > > I have a setup with several dovecot-servers (2.2.35) and I use dovecot > proxy. I upgraded one server to 2.3.1 and got the configs fixed so far > that it started again. But when I tried to add it into the proxying > again with "doveadm director add" I see the

Hey All I am very new to dovecot ecosystem. Found the software really robust and secure. Kudos to the team!!! We are setting up dovecot imap servers sharing a single nfs mount point. So to avoid nfs cache issues, we are setting up dovecot director. We are using dovecot version 2.2.10. While going through the documentation of dovecot director I stumbled across the following lines in passdb

Hi, I have a setup with several dovecot-servers (2.2.35) and I use dovecot proxy. I upgraded one server to 2.3.1 and got the configs fixed so far that it started again. But when I tried to add it into the proxying again with "doveadm director add" I see the following in the logfiles: May 6 07:19:30 host dovecot: director: Warning: Director xxx.xxx.xxx.176:9090/out disconnected us with

Hi, I have a setup with 3 Dovecot Director v2.2.36 and director_consistent_hashing = yes ;-) Now I would like to upgrade to 2.3.7, first only Director and after also Backend. Can works fine a ring of director with mixed 2.2 and 2.3 version? Mi idea is to setup a new Director server with 2.3, stop one server with 2.2 and insert the new 2.3 in the current ring to check if works fine. If all

On 18 Jul 2019, at 11.44, Alessio Cecchi via dovecot <dovecot at dovecot.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > I have a setup with 3 Dovecot Director v2.2.36 and director_consistent_hashing = yes ;-) > > Now I would like to upgrade to 2.3.7, first only Director and after also Backend. > > Can works fine a ring of director with mixed 2.2 and 2.3 version? > > Mi idea is to

On 15 May 2018, at 12.06, Timo Sirainen <tss at iki.fi> wrote: > > If you look at .176's error log, do you see an error about "director_consistent_hashing settings differ between directors"? Have you set director_consistent_hashing=yes in the old directors? That is needed now, because the old non-consistent-hashing method is obsoleted. Unfortunately there's no easy

Il 18/07/19 21:42, Timo Sirainen ha scritto: > On 18 Jul 2019, at 11.44, Alessio Cecchi via dovecot > <dovecot at dovecot.org <mailto:dovecot at dovecot.org>> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I have a setup with 3 Dovecot Director v2.2.36 and >> director_consistent_hashing = yes ;-) >> >> Now I would like to upgrade to 2.3.7, first only Director

Hi Timo, here you can see two images with the load average and CPU usage with Dovecot 2.2 (Centos 6) and 2.3 (Centos 7) on the same hardware and same configuration: https://imgur.com/a/1hsItlc Load average increment is relevant but CPU usage is similar. Il 22/07/19 18:49, Timo Sirainen ha scritto: > On 22 Jul 2019, at 17.45, Alessio Cecchi <alessio at skye.it > <mailto:alessio

Hello dovecot community, first of all: dovecot ist great! ;) ...nevertheless I?ve got some problems to get my director scenario running as needed/expected :( My scenario: I?d like to configure two dovecot backends, without the need for multiple dovecot instances. Both backend servers are active/active and act on top of a glusterfs storage, which implies the need for dovecot director. As

On 22 Jul 2019, at 17.45, Alessio Cecchi <alessio at skye.it> wrote: > > one server of the ring is now running Dovecot 2.3.7 and works fine with the others Dovecot 2.2 since 3 days. > I notice only that the load avarage of this CentOS 7 server is higher compared with CentOS 6 and Dovecot 2.2, but I don't know if is related to the new operating system or Dovecot (hardware is the

Hello Timo, The last time I checked my understanding about director was that : 1. backend/"real" imap servers should not be on the same host (or the same dovecot instance) to avoid proxying loops. Is it still the case with the latest 2.1 stable release ? Is there a plan to be able to run director and real server on the same host, thus requiring only 2 hosts instead of 4 to have

I think RR DNS is the only viable solution under these circumstances. If you can cope with the fact that failovers won't be seamless, I don't think there's anything wrong with that though. On 07/21/2015 11:54 AM, Laz C. Peterson wrote: > The consensus seems to say no to RR DNS ? I am going to take that into serious consideration. > > With this proxy setup you describe, what

Hi, we have a problem with our director proxy configuration. When we run on proxy server the doveadm command with -A switch, fails with the error: # doveadm -D quota get -A doveadm(user1): Debug: auth input: user=user1 proxy starttls=any-cert doveadm(user1): Error: Proxy is missing destination host doveadm: Error: Failed to iterate through some users If we execute the command with a single

The sample Director configuration (10-director.conf) says that director_servers and director_mail_servers can be lists of either IPs or hostnames: # List of IPs or hostnames to all director servers, including ourself. # Ports can be specified as ip:port. The default port is the same as # what director service's inet_listener is using. #director_servers = # List of IPs or hostnames to all

Hi, We have recently started using the director in some tests. We are using the static passdb setup (proxy=y nopassword=y) for now, where authentication is done on the downstream IMAP servers. "dovecot director status" shows a breakdown of proxied connections per backend, but there does not seem to be a similar breakdown of user connections per director. The output of

HI All, I have setup my Dovecot director proxies and Dovecot backend mail stores.? I intend setting up several incoming and outgoing Exim MTA's.? I am a bit confused about what I need to run on the backend Dovecot MTA's to get the incoming mail delivered to them.? Do I need to install Exim on them or use LMTP to receive mail from the MTA's?? Also, can I directly deliver mail to the

Hello, I'm build system with two director/proxy and dual stack network (or IPv6-only local services) http://wiki2.dovecot.org/Director say "This also means that a single director ring must use either IPv4 or IPv6 addresses, but not both at the same time." OK All servers have 2 interface (public and local network), and all dual stack IPv4/IPv6, imap/pop (mail) and lmtp (mx) proxy run

Hi All, Firstly, thanks for all the really helpful responses to my previous questions "Architecture for large Dovecot cluster" and "Sizing MTA servers". I am now trying to get a Dovecot director proxy working with a single backend mail server. When I try to connect to the dovecot proxy on the pop3 and imap ports I get connection refused. I want the authentication to

Hello, For a few days I try to understand what program (Dovecot Director or Dovecot Proxy) I should use for my email architecture. We are a hospital, and for security reasons, we must host ourselves our emails, and we must leave Google Apps... I wish to make a Dovecot backend for each department of the hospital. Each backend Dovecot has a local storage. Server 01: cardiology Server 02:

Hi, the Dovecot Director determines the backend host in some way by hashing the username: http://wiki2.dovecot.org/Director For normal logins username at example.org, the director always gets the same hash for the same username and ensures that the login is always proxied to the same backend. But what about MasterUsers in combination with Dovecot Director?