thanks. I think I like the Outlook approach the best. Will see what I can do.
Jeff On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 13:19, Vincent Jaussaud wrote: > On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 16:35, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > it doesn't lock it forever. > > > > anyways, maybe I can change it to try things differently if a port was > > specifically specified. but that won't really help if the port specified > > is not the smtp/s nor normal smtp port. since this same things will > > happen. > > > > I'd really like to know what mozilla and/or other clients that support > > both ways do. find that out for me and I'll hack something up. > Okay, here you go: > > Evolution 1.4.5 > - SMTPS first > - STARTTLS if SMTPS failed > > Mozilla 1.4 > - STARTTLS only > > Outlook & Outlook Express 6 > - STARTTLS if port 25 entered > - SMTPS if any other port entered > > Kmail 1.5.1 > - STARTTLS if selected SSL > - SMTPS if selected TLS > > I found out these using a sendmail daemon listening on port 25, doing > TLS and an stunnel process doing SMTPS, listening on port 465. > > Hope this will help you to hack something up :) > > Thanks > Regards, > > > > > Jeff > > > > On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 06:07, Vincent Jaussaud wrote: > > > On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 18:55, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > > > uh, that's exactly how it was explained that it would do. > > > Ok; sorry maybe I understood you wrongly. > > > > > > But still, you can't use this trick to force the use of STARTTLS first, > > > since talking SMTP-S over a STARTTLS channel will hung the SMTP session > > > forever, thus locking your outbox folder until you manually delete the > > > mail to be sent. > > > > > > I've just tried, and if I force the port number, my SMTP session hung > > > forever. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Vincent. > > > > > > > Jeff > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 12:18, Vincent Jaussaud wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 17:37, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Evolution lets you do this too... you could specify "servername:25" for > > > > > > > the hostname, although I'm not sure exactly how it will behave in this > > > > > > > case. It might try to first do SMTPS on port 25, fail, and then try > > > > > > > SMTP+STARTTLS. > > > > > > > > > > > > yea, I'm pretty sure that is how it would attempt to connect. > > > > > > > > > > > Nope; if you put the port number in; it'll try to negociate SMTP-S with > > > > > the remote MTA, over port 25, even if this one talks only STARTTLS. > > > > > > > > > > The result is that it will hung the SMTP session; since SMTP-S > > > > > initialise the SSL handshake directly after opening the socket; while > > > > > STARTTLS wait after the greetings dialog has been made (in plain text). > > > > > So basically, you'll try to talk SSL to a peer which expect plain text > > > > > input at first. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > Vincent. > > > > > > > > > > > Jeff > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > evolution maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Ximian, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.ximian.com _______________________________________________ evolution maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution
