Ricsi,
I've calmed down a little bit about this. Thanks for the detailed
information. My ISP does , in fact, use the new ESMTP thing which
does ask for IDENT and ignores it if there is no response and appears
to check the IP address of the client attempting to use the server.
It will send mail for messages originating in it's domain and will
do this even if the email address of the originator
is elsewhere. This way I can use another POP3 mailbox for incoming
and my own ISP's smtp to send the mail.
I suppose I see the concern about open and available to all servers,
but as I don't care about spam one way or the other, it doesn't
really affect me.
So far I'm still able to use Arachne and my old 386 to get and
recieve email. I am concerned that evolving standards and protocols
will make communication more difficult for people like myself all
over the world. Evolving standards don't always improve things in
that regard. I was concerned that Arachne wouldn't work anymore. It
does.
Although, I must say that Arachne is much less adept at dealing
with large volumes of email than Pine which I used previously from
my ISP's shell. Due to a merger with a larger ISP and a change in
policy, shell access is no longer available from my ISP.
On Sun, 04 Feb 2001 19:22:22 +0100 (CET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) wrote:
> Hi
> 03 Feb 2001, "Sam Ewalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> SE> My understanding of smtp servers is that they just relay the mail,
> SE> nothing is kept on the server and you can't get anything from the
> SE> server, all it does is take the mail you send it and sends it on
> SE> its way.
> Yes
> SE> There is no need for security, imho.
> wrong ...
> The problem is, WHICH mail they relay ...
> usually only a range of IPs are relayed ... GREAT
> or you authenticate yourself ... GOOD (though newer clients are needed)
> or the SMTPD is misconfigured, and relays everything _BAAAAAAAAAD_ !
> SE> Restricting mail delivery from traditional smtp servers is
> SE> intolerable to me and should be to others as well.
> WHY ??
> misconfiguring the SMTP server, so that everybody (including spammers) can
> send mail is very bad ...
> ORBS for example tries to send mail to itself through the questionable
> computer.
> If it refuses to deliver the mail ... good.
> If it delivers it, than it is blacklisted ...
> and this is good. (without that the number of SPAM mails would be HUGE)
> There are 2 cases:
> 1) server not listed in ORBS ... great ... mail comes through
> 2) server IS listed in ORBS.
> in 2) you will get back a message telling you that your mail has not been
> forwarded, because the SMTP server was blacklisted.
> again 2 choices:
> you tell your ISP,
> 1) ISP 'repairs' the configuration, and is tested again, everything's fine
> 2) ISP refuses to close down the relaying for everybody
> if your ISP chooses 2) than you should really consider changing your ISP.
> SE> Imagine if the postal service would only deliver mail from a certain
> SE> kind of "secure" mailbox. As long as the message fits the standard
> SE> email format, it should just be delivered.
> IMHO not ...
> It's the other way round.
> YOU only accept mail, from people who's name is not on the FBI's most
> wanted list.
> If a known criminal knocks at your door, than you will not open.
> SE> If people don't like the mail they get, they should just throw it
> SE> away (delete it) and quit their bitching about spam.
> I don't think so.
> SE> Sam Ewalt
> CU, Ricsi
> --
> |~)o _ _o Richard Menedetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> {ICQ: 7659421} (PGP)
> |~\|(__\| -=> But my little voice TOLD me to do it! <=-
Sam Ewalt
Croswell, Michigan
USA
-- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
