Re: why needs to be a direct SMTP-server?
On fre, juli 28, 2006 15:27, Chris Wagner wrote:
> At 03:11 PM 7/28/2006 +0200, sturla@hitconsult.no wrote:
>>When I put up my first mail-server some years ago I had problems sending
>>mail to servers using sorbs or other blacklists blocking non-static ip's,
>>but only until I found out I could use my isp's SMTP as a smart-host,
>> this
>>seemed to solve that problem, or is it something I'm missing?
>>Is there any reason why your server needs to be a direct SMTP-server?
>
> What a refreshing post. :) Ur totally right. Forwarding to ur ISP is the
> "right" way to do it. It has several advantages. Reduces configuration
> and
> maintenance on ur end. Offloads server work, less DNS, disk, and CPU
> time.
> It can actually improve mail performance because u can take advantage of
> ur
> upstream's cacheing, redundancy, and aggregation. One reason u would
> actually want to deliver ur own mail is if u were doing something special,
> like private or secure mail services. TLS, SMTP login, etc. Something ur
> upstream couldn't do. Or if u don't trust them, they're broken, etc.
>
Ok, just to clarify (to me that is), what exactly do you mean by private
or secure mail services?
If you're going to have things encrypted from end to end the admin of the
receiving SMTP would have to work with you on some level wouldn't (s)he?
And SMTP-login is in to your server, not out from it, so that should work
regardless, shouldn't it?
Sturla
Reply to: