nadams wrote:

I know this is a pipe dream type feature - but can you look into bundling OpenChange? SOGo with activesync covers most use cases I think - but people on Mac OS are still left to use IMAP and third party plugins. I think if you had OpenChange it would be a game changer - people who currently run exchange can drop it for a cheaper and easier to maintain solution as they can support most versions of outlook (as well as some third party clients such as evolution).

You are asking for the wrong solution in this case. OpenChange was here to replace MAPI. But Microsoft is moving away from MAPI since Exchange 2013. That's why OpenChange is not in active development either. The new default protocol is "MAPI over HTTP". [1] From this page: "While MAPI over HTTP is now the default communication protocol between Outlook and Exchange, clients that don't support it will fall back to Outlook Anywhere (RPC over HTTP)." So what we would really need is a software which implements "MAPI over HTTP" and/or "Outlook Anywhere (RPC over HTTP)".

Newer versions of Outlook can connect with ActiveSync as well.

[1] https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/lib … PIHTTP2013

Don't want to hijack the thread but newer version of Outlook on Windows can connect with ActiveSync. And that works great (a little quirky - but I'll take it without having to pay massive fees and headaches for Exchange). But some of my clients use Mac OS - and the current consensus [1] seems like Microsoft is not interested adding EAS support on the Mac versions of outlook (what are they thinking over there!? Even outlook on Android has EAS support!). Yes - they can use IMAP/plugins to get the same experience - but EAS simplifies everything. As an aside - according to OpenChange documentation they do support RPC over HTTP/Outlook Anywhere [2]. However, if it's not maintained I would absolutely not want it bundled with iredadmin.

If I had a choice - I would just setup my clients with Macs with thunderbird and call it a day - but they are ingrained with Outlook and older clients so they don't like change. When I first started using SOGo - I just assumed Microsoft added EAS support to all newer versions of Outlook - but that isn't the case for Mac users .

[1] https://outlook.uservoice.com/forums/29 … ctive-sync
[2] https://sogo.nu/files/docs/v2/SOGoNativ … nGuide.pdf

OpenChange was here to replace MAPI. But Microsoft is moving away from MAPI since Exchange 2013. That's why OpenChange is not in active development either.

Thanks for sharing, Raffael.

I know this is a pipe dream type feature - but can you look into bundling OpenChange? SOGo with activesync covers most use cases I think - but people on Mac OS are still left to use IMAP and third party plugins. I think if you had OpenChange it would be a game changer - people who currently run exchange can drop it for a cheaper and easier to maintain solution as they can support most versions of outlook (as well as some third party clients such as evolution).

You are asking for the wrong solution in this case. OpenChange was here to replace MAPI. But Microsoft is moving away from MAPI since Exchange 2013. That's why OpenChange is not in active development either. The new default protocol is "MAPI over HTTP". [1] From this page: "While MAPI over HTTP is now the default communication protocol between Outlook and Exchange, clients that don't support it will fall back to Outlook Anywhere (RPC over HTTP)." So what we would really need is a software which implements "MAPI over HTTP" and/or "Outlook Anywhere (RPC over HTTP)".

Newer versions of Outlook can connect with ActiveSync as well.

[1] https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/lib … PIHTTP2013

nadams wrote:

can you look into bundling OpenChange?

No plan to integrate OpenChange. sorry.

But, correct me if i was wrong:

*) OpenChange is not under active development? Latest commit was Dec 16, 2015 (master branch). https://github.com/openchange/openchange
*) OpenChange maintained by SOGo team: https://github.com/inverse-inc/openchange Last commit was 2013.
*) OpenChange maintained by Zentyal team: https://github.com/zentyal/openchange Last commit was Apr 5, 2016.

Also, I cannot find a document to successfully integrate OpenChange.

I did not realize it was, for lack of a better word, abandoned. It's highlighted on the SOGo website so I kind of figured they were working together. It's a shame - it has such great potential. It's a huge project no doubt - but I'm sure there are plenty of people stuck on exchange who would throw in a few bucks for a chance to migrate off.

can you look into bundling OpenChange?

No plan to integrate OpenChange. sorry.

But, correct me if i was wrong:

*) OpenChange is not under active development? Latest commit was Dec 16, 2015 (master branch). https://github.com/openchange/openchange
*) OpenChange maintained by SOGo team: https://github.com/inverse-inc/openchange Last commit was 2013.
*) OpenChange maintained by Zentyal team: https://github.com/zentyal/openchange Last commit was Apr 5, 2016.

Also, I cannot find a document to successfully integrate OpenChange.

I have use this feature in the Exchange 2003 server I replaced with your iRedMail solution.

Thanks for sharing. I will try to implement it in future release.

tom cotton wrote:

What is meant is that I could have a mail list that includes a number of valid email addresses. This mail list email address is saved in the Whitelist. At the time that an email arrives, or is sent, at that time that Whitelists are evaluated, then the mail list email is replaced with all the individual email addresses in order to do the validation. What is saved is the maillist and only exposes the members when the whitelist is evaluated. I hope this makes sense.

Your explanation is clear. Do you know which product has this feature?

This feature is interesting, but will introduce more SQL/LDAP queries to evaluate which mailing list the sender belongs to.
Add to my TODO list, but no guarantee when it will be implemented.

I have use this feature in the Exchange 2003 server I replaced with your iRedMail solution.

What is meant is that I could have a mail list that includes a number of valid email addresses. This mail list email address is saved in the Whitelist. At the time that an email arrives, or is sent, at that time that Whitelists are evaluated, then the mail list email is replaced with all the individual email addresses in order to do the validation. What is saved is the maillist and only exposes the members when the whitelist is evaluated. I hope this makes sense.

Your explanation is clear. Do you know which product has this feature?

This feature is interesting, but will introduce more SQL/LDAP queries to evaluate which mailing list the sender belongs to.
Add to my TODO list, but no guarantee when it will be implemented.

I would like to have maillist group expansion withing the Whitelist / Blacklist function in real time.

About "expansion", do you mean if you type an address of mailing list, iRedAdmin-Pro should replace the address by all its members?

Thanks for all your work on this iRedMail project.

toxic wrote:

We are using iRedAdmin Pro LDAP and were wondering wether it is possible to disable the maillog view for domain administrators so that only the system administrator can see who received/sent mails.

I will implement it in next release (not the upcoming bug fix release, sorry).

But want to discuss: isn't it reasonable that an admin can view it since he/she is the mail admin? What's the concern behind this restriction?

Super, thank you!
I agree with you but our customers wanted their particular domain administrator for iredadmin not to see the mail traffic logs because most of them were just assigned the task to add mail users etc. and not to snoop around in for ex. their colleagues maillog.

We are using iRedAdmin Pro LDAP and were wondering wether it is possible to disable the maillog view for domain administrators so that only the system administrator can see who received/sent mails.

I will implement it in next release (not the upcoming bug fix release, sorry).

But want to discuss: isn't it reasonable that an admin can view it since he/she is the mail admin? What's the concern behind this restriction?