On Mon 28 Jul 2014 at 17:05:56 -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > On 7/28/2014 4:56 PM, Brian wrote: > > > > Exim will definitely *receive* mail on multiple ports; that much I do > > know. Sending on other than port 25 would appear to contradict the idea > > that MTAs only communicate over port 25. But I'll look into it. > > > > Yes and no. There is also an concept of "smart host" (I don't know if > this is exim only), where all outgoing mail is routed through a > different host. It's quite often used in large companies, for instance, > where an MTA receives all mail from users and delivers locally. This > server is not directly accessible via the internet; rather another MTA > handles all traffic in and out of the network. > > But the main thought here is - you shouldn't be running a local mail > server on a residential account. There really is no need for it > (business accounts are different).
You would have to explain that very, very carefully to me. Nobody who is not part of a corporate environment is allowed to deliver their own mail? I am not permitted to have the freedom to communicate in whatever way I want because I live in a house and do not work in a office? Is that in an RFC? You are telling me there is no need to pop a letter though the letterbox of the house next door because I can get Royal Mail to do it for me? > > If exim cannot send over port 587......... And how do I know the mail > > server I'm connecting to is accepting on port 587? I don't think mine > > does; I'll have to check. I'm provisionally of the same opinion as > > expressed above; the flow of communication is controlled. > > > > I never said Exim cannot send over port 587. In fact, I said just the > opposite. I just don't know enough about Exim configuration to provide > the details. > > But then if you have residential service, there really is no need to > have your own MTA (other than you want it). I want to. When I go to relatives in London I want to take parcelled up birthday presents with me rather than entrust them to DHL. Of course, I needn't - but I want to. > And even if you do have your own MTA, it doesn't help that much. When > you send a message, all your MTA can do is tell you if the message was > accepted by the destination MTA. Using a remote MTA will do the same thing. You are guaranteeing the remote MTA will have 100% uptime and sends mails and non-delivery messages in a timely fashion? And yes, knowing the mail was accepted by the destination MTA is important; when someone says they haven't received a mail from me I can demonstrate otherwise. > One other thing - if you have a dynamic IP address, none of the servers > I maintain will ever accept your email. Dynamic IPs are specifically > blocked due to spam problems. That is also becoming more and more common. Dynamic IP = spam senders. What's that? 80%. 90% of the people on the internet. Disenfranchisement on a massive scale. O brave new world, That has such people in't. > > I don't need or want protecting from myself. I'll go to hell in my own > > way. :) > > The problem is it's not YOU who suffers if your machine is compromised. > It is the rest of the internet. Compromised? No need to worry; everything is in capable hands. Unlike the large ISP networks which harbour spam bots. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140728223600.ge19...@copernicus.demon.co.uk