[unisog] Barracuda effectiveness (vs Puremessage)

Paul Russell prussell at nd.edu
Wed Jul 18 01:14:15 GMT 2007


We have been using Barracuda technology for two years. We started with a
clustered pair, but encountered ongoing performance problems related to
their clustering technology. Barracuda eventually replaced the clustered
pair with a single, larger model. We have continued to experience a variety
problems with this product. We are currently awaiting resolution on several
problems, including, but not limited to:

* Unscheduled outages - the scanning process hangs, causing the MTA to stop
   accepting inbound messages. The hung process must be killed and restarted.
   This requires intervention by Barracuda Technical Support. This problem has
   been escalated to Engineering, but is still unresolved.

* Accept/reject errors - random incidents in which blacklist or whitelist
   entries are ignored, or messages are rejected with error messages and code
   which erroneously indicate that the client (sending server) IP is
   blacklisted. This problem has been escalated to Engineering.

* Local bcc recipient addresses are visible when the message source is viewed
   in the quarantine inbox. This problem was resolved once, but reappeared
   after a firmware upgrade.

-- 
Paul Russell, Senior Systems Administrator
OIT Messaging Services Team
University of Notre Dame
prussell at nd.edu


More information about the unisog mailing list