Russell Nelson wrote:
> Dave Sill writes:
,,,
> > I disagree. Yes, I could configure my server to pass everything off to
> > the ISP's mail hub, but, frankly, I can do a better job of it than
> > they can. And switching to a more competant ISP is not an
> > option. Where I live, there's only one ISP that's reachable via a
> > local call.
...
> Too late, Dave. You're trying to solve the wrong problem. People are
> already blocking dialups, more and more every day. Your problem is
> now to find a non-dialup SMTP client to relay your mail, which isn't
> your ISP's. Obviously it's a necessary service -- why not start
> providing it?
Sounds like an opportunity for someone to jump in and offer up an SMTP
end point service. Since port 25 won't be reachable, options include
using another port (can qmail be configured to send and receive on any
arbitrary port?) or tunnelling. How would it be secured? Would qmail
handle it securely? If by IP address, can qmail make sure the IP is
not spoofed? Personally I like the idea of tunnels since that gives a
number of other options, too.
--
Phil Howard | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
phil | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
at | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ipal | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dot | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
net | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
