let's take a step back for a moment too and remember that this is Network
Solutions we're talking about here, who seem to have an amazing ability to
screw up anything they get their hands on.
shag
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wed 9 Feb 2000 11.35
Subject: RE: Big and/or famous sites using qmail?
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> And Network Solutions, of course.
>
>Not something to be proud of, as 2 days ago Jon Rust claimed
>in message <v0421013fb4c4c040b1e4@[209.239.239.22]> that
>Network Solutions runs an open relay.
It's no longer an open relay.
>I expect unsophisticated users like myself to stuff up, but
>if large sites can't run qmail properly,
Large sites *can* run qmail properly. People--even people at large
sites--make mistakes.
>maybe qmail could benefit from some more guard-rails.
Arguably, qmail should deny relaying in the absence of
control/rcphosts. Hopefully this will change with qmail 2. BTW, the
historical record shows that the by-the-docs qmail installation
disabled relaying well before the by-the-docs sendmail
installation. qmail was anti-relaying before anti-relaying was cool.
-Dave
