[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [exim4] mixed up about terminology



On 10/6/2014 10:26 AM, Brian wrote:
> On Mon 06 Oct 2014 at 09:09:42 -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> 
>> On 10/6/2014 5:41 AM, Harry Putnam wrote:
>>> Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>> So they would all be sending mail by way of server host.
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess that is not what is meant by relaying?
>>>>
>>>> I think that's relaying, but not open relay (if you get it set up right).
>>>>
>>>> But you should consider why you want to send out through a central server,
>>>> unless your firewall is for some reason set up to only allow outbound mail
>>>> from that server, in which case you probably do want to authenticate on the
>>>> lan, too. (Think, for example, about the possibility of malware on a local
>>>> box.)
>>>
>>> My reason was just to simplify the mail setup. I expect to have a
>>> dozen or so vms (of a variety of OS) at some point in the future.
>>
>> You are only making the setup more complicated.  You generally only need
>> one MTA on the network.
> 
> My understanding is that he only has one MTA on his network,
>

Then why are you suggesting he set up dc_relay_nets?  Oh, I forgot -
you're the guy who thinks setting up an MTA properly is easy.

>> BTW - what's wrong with just using your ISP's MTA?  There are definite
>> advantages - like not having Port 25 blocked by your ISP, which more and
>> more are doing, especially for residential connections.
> 
> His MTA services his network and relays mail to his ISP's MTA. They will
> accept it. Seems like a very efficient proposed setup.
> 

OK, now you show me the holes in his setup - those things which can
potentially cause him problems.

You can't?  I'm not surprised...

Jerry


Reply to: