>I have no problems with ISPs block 25 for non-business users, but
>they should allow port 25 connections into their mail servers from
>all customer systems. Requiring customers to use the newer submission
>port assumes a specific home user model (but ISPs may not care
>about advanced home users).
On January 22, 2010 at 17:12, Ken Hornstein wrote:
> I'm not really here to debate you on this ... but the _point_
> is to prevent zombie PCs from doing final delivery to random sites
> on the internet. It's a lot easier for the ISP to notice, "Hey, you
> just tried to send 5000 emails in the spa
Earl Hood wrote:
> On January 22, 2010 at 16:26, Ken Hornstein wrote:
>
>> The port 25 block is pretty much standard for large ISPs today; it's
>> to prevent spammers from using massive networks of compromised PCs to
>> deliver spam.
>
> Changing ports is useless unless authentication is required
>> The port 25 block is pretty much standard for large ISPs today; it's
>> to prevent spammers from using massive networks of compromised PCs to
>> deliver spam.
>
>Changing ports is useless unless authentication is required.
>If deterring spammers is the primary goal, then ISPs can just require
>a
On January 22, 2010 at 16:26, Ken Hornstein wrote:
> The port 25 block is pretty much standard for large ISPs today; it's
> to prevent spammers from using massive networks of compromised PCs to
> deliver spam.
Changing ports is useless unless authentication is required.
If deterring spammers is t
>Is authentication required? Just changing the port does little
>to deter spam since spammers can adapt. I would assume that
>the port change also comes with the requirement that you must
>specify your username and password.
The port 25 block is pretty much standard for large ISPs today; it's
to
>> Also, the smtp port should be configurable vs hardcoded.
>
>It is. As Ken noted earlier in this thread:
>
> send: -port submission
>
>(The -port option to send and post doesn't appear in their man pages.)
Actually, it does ... but it doesn't appear in 1.3, because the code
didn't make it into
Earl wrote:
> I do not know if nmh supports any authentication capabilities.
It optionally supports SASL:
Sat Jul 8 01:36:19 EDT 2000 Kimmo Suominen
* Applied Ken Hornstein 's patches
implementing SASL support for POP3 and SMTP. If nmh is compiled
with SASL support, u
On January 22, 2010 at 11:02, "Stewart W Wilson" wrote:
> I tried the patch given by Valdis Kletnieks
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/nmh-workers/2004-08/msg8.html
> I changed smtp.c (in nmh1.3) as he said to do.
> But it didn't work. The "no servers available" error didn't occur,
> but t
>I'm not sure what "(n)curses based" means, though I think
>that "command line" would be better.
I interpreted the original request as meaning that the commands
are "proper" curses applications i.e; dividing the terminal into
windows of content that are displayed and interacted with via
newwin(3X),
> >It depends on what's provided on the platform. configure
> >searches for available libraries in this order:
> > termcap_curses_order="termcap curses ncurses"
> I don't think that really qualifies as curses based,
> using an variant of a standard library that might be provided by (n)curses.
I'
>It depends on what's provided on the platform. configure
>searches for available libraries in this order:
> termcap_curses_order="termcap curses ncurses"
I don't think that really qualifies as curses based,
using an variant of a standard library that might be provided by (n)curses.
And that is
It depends on what's provided on the platform. configure
searches for available libraries in this order:
termcap_curses_order="termcap curses ncurses"
libtermcap.so (and libtinfo.so) can be provided by ncurses on Linux.
For info on ncurses:
http://invisible-island.net/ncurses/ncurses.faq.htm
I tried the patch given by Valdis Kletnieks
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/nmh-workers/2004-08/msg8.html
I changed smtp.c (in nmh1.3) as he said to do.
But it didn't work. The "no servers available" error didn't occur,
but this time send just hung.
Attached is the mts.conf file.
Any ideas
No, it is not ncurses based
# ldd mhshow
libiconv.so.2 => /usr/local/lib/libiconv.so.2 (0x2af0a6328000)
libtermcap.so.2 => /lib64/libtermcap.so.2 (0x2af0a6609000)
libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x2af0a680c000)
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x2af0a
http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Mail/muas.html says that nmh is Ncurses-based.
Is that true? If so,What does it mean?
Norman Shapiro
798 Barron Avenue
Palo Alto CA 94306-3109
(650) 565-8215
n...@dad.org
___
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-wo
> I have heard that a small change in the file mts/smtp/smtp.c
> (of nmh 1.3) will change the mail port from 25 to 587 and get around
> Verizon's port 25 block.
>
> Does anyone have that change? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
> Thank you.
I had the same problem (using a different ISP).
17 matches
Mail list logo