On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 12:44:34PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a mail server behind a obsd 3.5 firewall and I am having timeout errors
when I try and send an email with a large (5MB or greater) attachment.
i would have the knee-jerk reaction that this is not due to pf.
So the
jared r r spiegel writes:
i would have the knee-jerk reaction that this is not due to pf.
Just being a user of pf I had the same reaction. My question would be;
How do things work when you reduce pf to just the nessessary NAT?
On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 02:17:46 -0600, jared r r spiegel wrote:
On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 12:44:34PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a mail server behind a obsd 3.5 firewall and I am having timeout errors
when I try and send an email with a large (5MB or greater) attachment.
i would have
Rod.. Whitworth writes:
Back in the genuine DOS days Peter Norton had a good name. He should be
suing Symantec for the shit his name is getting due to their stupidity.
We use F-prot on win boxes. It costs $20USD for up to 10 and $2...
Back in the day. Remember when they used to put his picture on
On Thursday 29 July 2004 13.05, Rod.. Whitworth wrote:
I agree with jared on this and would like to suggest that NAV running
on the WinClient is the worst dumb POS I have ever had this misfortune
to have to deal with. It can only do the most elementary smtp and pop
transactions and fails
Hello Rod,
You may remember me from that BINAT problem a while back. I got it
sorted. I didn't have the external IP addresses aliased on the NAT box.
All sorted now.
I had assumed that as the box was on the edge of the network range that
it would pick hook onto those IPs. Still doesn't matter.
