GMS Re-write as a connector, not hub-and-spoke.

Idea ID 2788437

GMS Re-write as a connector, not hub-and-spoke.

GMS came to be as a happy accident. An anything-to-anything synchronizer could also be used to sync Activesync devices to GroupWise using a hub database and adding a GroupWise connector and a Mobility (Activesync) connector.

However, the days of "hey look! I have mail on my phone!" have given way to "I need mail on my phone!" and so many of the ideas in this portal can be solved by taking the current GMS code, strippiing out the database part and going straight from GW to Activesync, much like the WebAccess application talks directly to SOAP.

This would eliminate database maintenance, storage limitations, sync limitations and every device would see the live GW mailbox at all times.

Exchange does it like this -- it's a connector you switch on and off, like MAPI, Outlook Web Access and so on.

When moving users into GroupWise or doing large-volume operations on a mailbox, the current GMS design causes an immense slowdown to the whole GMS server.

Implementing GMS as a connector, much like WebAccess is now would solve many problems.
It would enable easy Disaster Recovery (just turn it on in the DR post office)
It would allow synchronization on a per user basis - any amount of the PO.
It would allow searches of the live mailbox.
It would allow sync of any address books.
It could even allow for proxy access.

PLUS
It can enable Outlook as a client.
It can enable Mac based Activesync client.

This should be the next thrust of effort in GMS, IMO.
28 Comments
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner
Couldn't agree more, but design mistakes like this (and duplicating data is virtually always a design mistake) tend to live forever.
Absent Member.
Absent Member.
Today, we were bitten yet again by the design. A network outage yesterday caused a flood of e-mail which overwhelmed the GMS sync. Consequently, we lost 6 hours of production time while GMS raced to process a flooded queue. With a connector-based system, this would simply not occur. It is becoming a very major issue here and it's because of WHO the users of mobility are within the organization (the top execs) that this is so highly visible and why the pain point is especially severe. Exchange has Activesync as a connector. This is causing a very strong push to move off of GroupWise.
Honored Contributor.
Honored Contributor.
For me this is the most important idea for gms. In 2016 our users simply won't put up with not having access to all the features of our mail system on their phones and tablets. This includes not just ALL their mail but full search too.
Outstanding Contributor.
Outstanding Contributor.
This needs to be done, as well the ability all webservices for Groupwise on a single server if required, and also a gwclient over http protocol to allow for Groupwise clients to connect over http/https, as many networks do not have common Groupwise clients ports opened.
Absent Member.
Absent Member.
I have mentioned this a number of times and is something that should be made NUMBER 1 priority. I appreciate existing existing mobility code exists and may be difficult to do but Mobility should be a Groupwise agent.
Trusted Contributor.
Trusted Contributor.
Put GMS in GW. I like the Idea of SOAP like Webacc.
Super Contributor.
Super Contributor.
+1 absolutely necessary...
Absent Member.
Absent Member.
This is a MAJOR requirement and should be in GW 2017
Super Contributor.
Super Contributor.
We (700 GMS users0 would be very happy if this happens. GMS is working, but still have problems with missing appointments, people wich have missing contacts, etc. So a direct connection like webaccess with soap can things bring more reliable.
Absent Member.
Absent Member.
Idea sounds good. But I still like to have an ability to place the connector--service on a different machine into the DMZ (appliance would be nice like the ones Mobile Iron is using). And I would like to have control which accounts are reachable through the connector and which not. I fully agree that the current architecture isn't very admin friendly, and a waste of resources.
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Micro Focus. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation. Certain versions of content ("Material") accessible here may contain branding from Hewlett-Packard Company (now HP Inc.) and Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company. As of September 1, 2017, the Material is now offered by Micro Focus, a separately owned and operated company. Any reference to the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks is historical in nature, and the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks are the property of their respective owners.