Graeme Fowler wrote: > To coin the approach of one W.B.Hacker... > > On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 13:14 +0100, Marc Haber wrote: >> A lot of NAT devices can be configured that way. > > Can be. Aren't. Won't be. > > [sorry, Bill!]
No apology needed.. Part of the 'appliance-ization' of technology. > > In this case, Yves was experiencing a single problem with a single user > (himself), and had some control over the SMTP part of the equation - > there's no telling (and we don't want to know, Yves!) whether or not > similar levels of control over all possible devices in the chain > existed. > > Given that the vast majority of people running an MUA wouldn't know what > RFC1413 or the instructions for their firewall were if you printed them, > rolled them up and hit them with the resulting nice bundle of paper, > getting mass participation in the "play nicely and reject" scenario just > isn't going to happen. > > I appreciate that the advice exists, but there's (usually) a much wider > remit when providing an SMTP server than simply one person connecting to > use it as an outbound relay. Setting the appropriate options in Exim's > config makes it not do the lookup in the first place which, considering > (a) the reduction in auth/ident services being run, and (b) the > increasing number of devices which either block or reject ident calls > outright, is the best place to do it. In my opinion. > > Graeme > > Too many old standards (perhaps 80%?) have NOT kept up as well as they need to with shifting use, bending of rules - and originally unforseen abuse. smtp has lagged - but nowhere near as badly as ident. Reality dictates that the 'general case' is to no longer support it, nor expect it to be supported by others. Anywhere. Bill -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
