Michael Monnerie wrote: > On Montag 11 Mai 2009 Josh Marshall wrote: >> Not sure on your setup, but if you have access to multiple IP >> addresses, you can put a rule on the firewall to forward port 110 to >> e.g. 111 on the internal server. Otherwise default to internal >> clients connect to port 110 and external clients connect to port 111 >> via a portforward on the firewall. > > I prefer to KISS, so doing nasty firewall NAT is something I do as a > last resort, as it's something that keeps the "junior admins" bang their > heads ;-)
I was more thinking along the lines of usermap. Currently we support: login sock_allow sock_deny userid -+------------+----------------------+----------------------+---------- |ANY | inet:10.1.1.2:143 | | %[email protected] where someone logging in with 'somename' is mapped to '[email protected]' if accessing port 10.1.1.2:143 along the sames lines we could do: login sock_allow sock_deny userid -+------------+----------------------+----------------------+---------- |MOBILE | inet:10.1.1.3:143 | | %s#mobile so here 'somename' is mapped to a /virtual/ userid if accessing port 10.1.1.3:143, a different ip address. contrary to the first example the login wouldnt be mapped to a 'real' userid, but to an id that will trigger special behaviour down the line. In this case resulting in a changed mime reconstruction using URL references to attachments. Of course, you could have some mailclient use the virtual userid directly without using usermap, but with usermap all you'd have to explain to your mobile device users would be to use an other servername. -- ________________________________________________________________ Paul Stevens paul at nfg.nl NET FACILITIES GROUP GPG/PGP: 1024D/11F8CD31 The Netherlands________________________________http://www.nfg.nl _______________________________________________ DBmail mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.fastxs.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbmail
