Question: Server using Apache and Plesk 9.

I have set-up multiple domains each with its own IP for SSL. 
Each domain has its own SSL config file **/var/www/vhosts/mydomain/conf/vhost\_ssl.conf**

I have disabled SSLv2 in **/etc/httpd/conf.d/ssl.conf**
and checked it with 

`openssl s_client –ssl2 –connect localhost:443`
result is an error.. which is correct

However when i test the domain to see if SSLv2 is disabled

`openssl s_client –ssl2 –connect mydomain:443`
result is domain has SSLv2 support - not what i want

My question is... Do i have to add lines to /var/www/vhosts/mydomain/conf/vhost\_ssl.conf to disable SSLv2 support for that domain...?

Is yes, do i need to copy the full `<VirtualHost _default_:443>....</VirtualHost>` section form **/etc/httpd/conf.d/ssl.conf** and add it to **/var/www/vhosts/mydomain/conf/vhost\_ssl.conf** ?

Answer: 
I have a lot of understanding for your users. You are doing a fundamental error of system administration: You create a solution that is easy for the sysadmins, but forget the needs and requirements of the users. 200mb per user is simply insane, and it is a limitation that causes problems for them, as they have to bother with archives and backups. This is wasted time and wasted money. The cost of 1gb of storage compared to the time it takes to sort 1gb of emails is extremely bad on the cost/benefit scale. 

Why don't you provide your users with "unlimited" storage space? In practice, it won't grow very fast. It will take away the whole problem with the local archiving when the users no longer need to delete e-mails.

So, what you should be telling your users is "You don't need personal folders anymore. We will store all the e-mails for you, and take care of the backups."
PST files get a bad wrap and sometimes it's overblown and unwarranted. If my company uses Microsoft Exchange server then using PST files is generally frowned upon. If my company uses an external email provider that supports only POP then there's almost no alternative to using PST files. It's not that PST files themselves are bad, it's the fact that users generally tend to let them grow to mammoth proportions and the fact that they're not easily managed from a system perspective. I agree with pehrs in that you're creating a system that works for the management without taking the needs of your users into account. You're proposing to take something away from your users without providing them a way to retain their emails once they've surpassed whatever mailbox size limit you choose to impose.

I see a lot of questions here that fall in to a pattern of "this is bad" or "I know I shouldn't do this" without the requisite analysis as to why "this is bad" or why "I shouldn't do this" in a particular scenario. The use of PST files is one of those subjects where there is a lot of "PST files are evil" hyperbole that is just so much jumping on the bandwagon without being given any critical thought as to how they apply to your specific situation. Are PST files really evil? Are they really such a bad thing? The answer is no. Can they be problematic? Yes. It's your job to analyze the risks and benefits of using them in your organization and determine whether or not using them is a workable solution, and if not, implementing an alternative that works for your users.

The IT staff, resources, and infrastructure is there to enable the business to be smarter, more efficient, more productive, and more profitable. You are there for them, not the other way around.