On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 09:43:14AM -0500, Jeff Kinz wrote: > On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 06:17:10AM -0500, Fred wrote: > > On Tuesday 07 March 2006 16:43, Ed Lawson wrote: > > > "Brian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Sending an email through your own/alternate server should not > > > > be prevented. > > > > > > I understand your sentiment, but should has nothing to do with > > > it. Should is not a > > > factor. There is an agreement which specifies the service to > > > which you are entitled upon payment for that service. You are > > > entitled to nothing more and nothing less. > > > > I send my mail out to my dedicated servers all the time over encrypted > > connections. SMTP has TLS and SSL options, and one of them goes across a > > port other than 25. > > Fred, I'm not sure I understand this. The thread is talking about > sending mail out from our own systems which is getting port blocked by > some ISP's. You seem to be talking about sending mail out to your > alternate server (from which, I assume, it is further redistributed). > > Are these the same things?
The quoted post that he replied to from Brian was talking about sending through an alternate server. (Both topics were covered in this thread.) Sending out mail over another port to your SMTP server is one solution to the problem at hand, assuming you have a server to send it to. If your only mail server is hosted on a home cable/dsl connection, I think that you're likely making a mistake anyway: the reliability of these connections is hardly guarenteed at the consumer level, so presumably anyone hosting mail from home does have *some* alternative. -- Christopher Schmidt Web Developer _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
