> Furthermore, if people were interested in discussing 'the
> behavior of qmail in
> a "firewall environment"', I think that a discussion probably would have
> started by now. The problem is, there are really no MTA-specific
> issues with
> running a mail server behind a firewall. That makes it a
> firewall discussion,
> not a qmail discussion.
Hmmm... Well, if I understand it correctly, the Memphis RPM
is more than an MTA collection. Included in it is a tcpserver.
The tarball installation does not require that a tcpserver be
installed, and one of the differences between my tarball
installation and the Memphis RPM installation is that the smtp
daemon (under the control of the tcpserver) worked, whereas
it did not when I installed the tarball.
Mate asked me if I was running a firewall, since, my pop3 daemon
seems to be answering port 110, but only from within my own
network, not from outside of it.
When Linux was first set up, a firewall was installed. Since
Mate asked that question, I have been perusing the internet
on firewalls, so I can see if I can handle this.
So, I'm studying firewalls now, to see if I can get port 110 to answer
remotely, so I can get pop3 working from outside.
Sorry if you think that answering port 110 is not relevant to getting qmail
to work properly but you are entitled to think anything you like.
BTW, why do YOU think that Mate asked me if I had a firewall? Do you think
maybe he asked because it was relevant to the problem of answering port 110
from the outside and getting pop3 to work, or do you think he was being an
idiot for asking me a question which has nothing to do with MTA's?
Alex Miller
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam D. McKenna [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 11:25 PM
> To: Alex Miller; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Qmail@List. Cr. Yp. To
> Subject: Re: New qmail list et al
>
>
> From: Alex Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> This is getting ridiculous, but...
>
> : My serious objection in the case you mentioned was not the fact that
> : the word "idiot" was used even if for supposed cause but that it was
> : used to squelch any further discussion in a subject of great interest
> : to me, the behavior of qmail in a firewall environment and what can
> : happen to someone who is offering qmail services to the public and
> : is the target of nefarious folk.
>
> Nobody was called an idiot for their choice of topic. Nobody was
> called an
> idiot in order to end a conversation. The reason someone got
> called an idiot
> is that he was acting like an idiot.
>
> Furthermore, if people were interested in discussing 'the
> behavior of qmail in
> a "firewall environment"', I think that a discussion probably would have
> started by now. The problem is, there are really no MTA-specific
> issues with
> running a mail server behind a firewall. That makes it a
> firewall discussion,
> not a qmail discussion.
>
> : But on my list there will be no rule enforcement allowed.
>
> Can you please just go make your list and leave us alone?
>
> --Adam
>
>
>
