Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 20:31:28 +1100 terryc wrote: > On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 09:00:16 +0100 > wrote: > > > > To put that on stronger terms -- we'd end up with two and a half > > gatekeepers for mail: Google, Hotmail (aka Microsoft) and... who > > did I forget?

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

Forest wrote: > Does this work better? Evolution rather than web-based email. definitely

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 06:59:04PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > Sure, so in my case, I'd be forced to find out what my router's > hostname is so that I can quote a hostname that will resolve to the > address that I woud be posting on. Currently this appears to be > ip70-179-161-106.fv.ks.cox.net >

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

On Thu, 22 Mar 2018 08:59:11 +0100 deloptes wrote: > David Wright wrote: > > > Sure, so in my case, I'd be forced to find out what my router's > > hostname is so that I can quote a hostname that will resolve to the > > address that I woud be posting on. Currently this

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

David Wright wrote: > Sure, so in my case, I'd be forced to find out what my router's > hostname is so that I can quote a hostname that will resolve to the > address that I woud be posting on. Currently this appears to be > ip70-179-161-106.fv.ks.cox.net these are not valid SMTP domain names. It

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

Am 2018-03-21 hackte terryc in die Tasten: > On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 09:00:16 +0100 > wrote: >> To put that on stronger terms -- we'd end up with two and a half >> gatekeepers for mail: Google, Hotmail (aka Microsoft) and... who >> did I forget? > > yahoo for a starter, then there

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

On Wed, 2018-03-21 at 21:59 +0100, deloptes wrote: > Forest Dean Feighner wrote: > > > Right on! I used to have an email server in the 90's and even hand > > wrote > > the sendmail config file, lol. > > > > Shell account, of course, at the local ISP. > > and that's why you first topposted and

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

On Wed 21 Mar 2018 at 16:21:44 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 02:53:47PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > > HELO dotlessdomainname > > HELO dotcontaining.home > > > > I want someone to explain to me why having a dot is better then not > > having a dot in deciding

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

Joe wrote: > Indeed. Exim4 is fairly easy to configure either way. yes indeed, it took me only one month to write all the rules required (with irony)

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

Greg Wooledge wrote: > My understanding: the SMTP receiver will use whatever heuristics it > finds appropriate to avoid receiving spam. > > One heuristic that is commonly used is to reject all messages where > the HELO doesn't even syntactically qualify as a valid FQDN -- in other > words, has

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

Forest Dean Feighner wrote: > gmail... > > I have little to add. next time try the "..." on the bottom of the reply message before writing anything. it does wonder ;-) regards

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > +100 > > To put that on stronger terms -- we'd end up with two and a half > gatekeepers for mail: Google, Hotmail (aka Microsoft) and... who > did I forget? > > The same nightmare we have at the moment with the so-called "social" > networks. > > They are already

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

gmail... I have little to add. On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 4:59 PM, deloptes wrote: > Forest Dean Feighner wrote: > > > Right on! I used to have an email server in the 90's and even hand wrote > > the sendmail config file, lol. > > > > Shell account, of course, at the local

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

Forest Dean Feighner wrote: > Right on! I used to have an email server in the 90's and even hand wrote > the sendmail config file, lol. > > Shell account, of course, at the local ISP. and that's why you first topposted and secondly contributed with very meaningful content. :D

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 16:21:44 -0400 Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 02:53:47PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > > HELO dotlessdomainname > > HELO dotcontaining.home > > > > I want someone to explain to me why having a dot is better then not > > having

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 02:53:47PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > HELO dotlessdomainname > HELO dotcontaining.home > > I want someone to explain to me why having a dot is better then not > having a dot in deciding whether a submitter is genuine. And > without the politics. My

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

On Wed 21 Mar 2018 at 09:50:15 (+1100), Ben Finney wrote: > David Wright writes: > > > I don't understand why a home user would not be using a smarthost. > > Perhaps we're talking about a different group of people. Why would a > > home user want to relay mail rather

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 09:00:16 +0100 wrote: > To put that on stronger terms -- we'd end up with two and a half > gatekeepers for mail: Google, Hotmail (aka Microsoft) and... who > did I forget? yahoo for a starter, then there is that French mob OVH and the NL mob > > The

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 09:50:15AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > David Wright writes: > > > I don't understand why a home user would not be using a smarthost. [...] > First, note that even if you don't know the reason why

Re: Federated, decentralised communication on the internet (was: domain names, was: hostname)

Right on! I used to have an email server in the 90's and even hand wrote the sendmail config file, lol. Shell account, of course, at the local ISP. On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 7:13 PM, Forest Dean Feighner < forest.feigh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Right on! I used to have an email server in the 90's