[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
At ccil.org we limit relaying to specified IP's. The list includes CCIL's IP's as well as some other local ISP's. But this doesn't help if a CCIL user is on some big ISP/IP's we don't list. One solution used is SMTP Authenication but only some mail clients like Netscape and Outlook support it and that sucks. Does anyone have any suggestions for a better solution? I would very much prefer to use standard Debian packages on potato or woody with LDAP authenication. Does anyone know what I need to install to setup smtp authenication? I don't know how many of you heard about Verizon/Bell Atlantic ISP customers can no longer user the email address of thier choice. They are forced into using a Reply-To if they wish to use an outside domain for mail (and they use the Bell smtp relay servers). It was last week that I read the article, so I don't have the link handy, but it did say that 50,000 of the 950,000 customers are effected. Today I returned a call to a CCIL user/Bell customer about this issue and that reminded me about PLUG using this Reply-To on lists. If this CCIL user/Bell customer were on the list, his Reply-To would be rewritten by the list header rewrite. I don't know how many of you will have problems with this, but we may have a few list members that are Bell customers and use other email addresses. The PLUG list has "Reply-To: plug@lists.phillylinux.org", I would suggest that it be changed. Marc Merlin of SVLUG and VA Linux explains the issues very well at http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/reply-to-harmful.html. Here are a couple of paragraphs from Marc's page: <quote> Coddling the Brain-Dead, Penalizing the Conscientious There are, unfortunately, poorly implemented mail programs that lack separate reply-to-author and reply-to-group functions. A user saddled with such a brain-dead mailer can benefit from Reply-To munging. It makes it easier for him or her to send responses directly to the list. This change, however, penalizes the conscientious person that uses a reasonable mailer. This is a poor trade-off. As Internet list administrators, we should encourage people to run reasonable software. If a few people need to type in a full reply address so that everybody else can use all the features of their mailer, I say, ``Fine!'' We should not penalize the conscientious to coddle those who run brain-dead software. </quote> We run a number of lists using mailman here at CCIL and will be offering virtual domain lists to individuals, non-profits and community groups. Ironically, the CCIL board prefers we coddle the brain dead and would probably prefer we setup the "Reply-To", but they don't administrate our systems. ;) Thanks, Chuck ______________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group - http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug