From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from hodgsonfamily.org ([195.166.147.102] ident=qmailr) by speech.braille.uwo.ca with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19U786-0001cT-00 for ; Sun, 22 Jun 2003 11:51:46 -0400 Received: (qmail 2288 invoked from network); 22 Jun 2003 15:51:48 -0000 Received: from andrew.hodgsonfamily.org (192.168.1.3) by brookfield.hodgsonfamily.org (192.168.1.2) with SMTP; 22 Jun 2003 15:51:48 -0000 From: Andrew Hodgson To: speakup@braille.uwo.ca Subject: Re: sendmail authentication: correction Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 16:51:28 +0100 Message-ID: References: <4jgbfvofki2g93qr6tfb42o7j9huo7rhmg@mail.hodgsonfamily.org> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca Errors-To: speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca X-BeenThere: speakup@braille.uwo.ca X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: speakup@braille.uwo.ca List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Adam Myrow in : >On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Andrew Hodgson wrote: > >> I take it there is a reason you can't do direct end-to-end delivery >> using your copy of Sendmail? > >Well, nobody should do that. Before I really knew what I was doing with >Linux, that was what I attempted. A large number of ISPS will bounce = your >mail if you do that. They consider it a security risk since spammers = love >to use this method to send their garbage. Well this is how mail normally propergates around the Internet, so I am not sure why we shouldn't be doing that. I would rather ensure that my mail gets delivered to its destination than to put the responsability onto another machine. I realise that some isps block people who are on a dynamicip, but for people like mw who have a static ip this is not an issue. Andrew. --=20 Andrew Hodgson, Bromyard, Herefordshire, UK. Email: Andrew@hodgsonfamily.org