> You have tos et up an mx record of company.com pointing to
> jabber.su.company.com
I don't think MX records are supported by Jabber any more, they were
replaced by SRV records.
Thomas Parslow (PatRat)
E-Mail/Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ: 26359483
_
I'm starting to feel like that Aflack duck that nobody listens to.
You can simply forward ports 5222 and 5269 from company.com to
jabber.sub.company.com and everything will work like a charm :-)
Dave Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Thomas Parslow (PatRat)" wrote:
>
> > You have tos et up an mx reco
21, 2002 14:34
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [JDEV] Jabber server redirection
> I'm starting to feel like that Aflack duck that nobody listens to.
> You can simply forward ports 5222 and 5269 from company.com to
> jabber.sub.company.com and everything will work like a charm :-)
>
> Dave
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 08:34:54AM -0500, Dave wrote:
> I'm starting to feel like that Aflack duck that nobody listens to.
> You can simply forward ports 5222 and 5269 from company.com to
> jabber.sub.company.com and everything will work like a charm :-)
I'm sure that won't be acceptable in my ca
gt; - Original Message -
> From: "Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 14:34
> Subject: Re: Re[2]: [JDEV] Jabber server redirection
>
>
> > I'm starting to feel like that Aflack duck that nobod
As a matter of basic security, they should have a firewall between the
web server and the 'net. Any firewall can forward ports.
- Dave
Dave Dykstra wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 08:34:54AM -0500, Dave wrote:
> > I'm starting to feel like that Aflack duck that nobody listens to.
> > You
a operator-level
service, but
also for SOHO-use where people might not be that skilled...
/m
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 23:01
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [JDEV] Jabber server redirection
> What systems
t; My vision of jabber is that it not only should fit as a operator-level
> service, but
> also for SOHO-use where people might not be that skilled...
>
> /m
>
> - Original Message -
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thur
Ah, but there are two different company.com servers, one just for the
intranet and one for the internet. I only care about the one on the inside
and there's no need to have a firewall between it and the intranet.
Another problem with the forwarding idea is that I don't necessarily want
to locate
Okay, I see what you're talking about. Your situation is a lot more
complex than I thought. SRV records and/or coordinated routers are
definitely your best bet. I tend to like coordinated routers, because
everything is transparent to your users, but SRV records are better for
some rather fundam
10 matches
Mail list logo
