On 10/6/2014 8:05 AM, Brian wrote: > On Mon 06 Oct 2014 at 16:31:52 +1300, Chris Bannister wrote: > >> On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 11:16:18PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote: >>> >>> So they would all be sending mail by way of server host. >>> >>> I guess that is not what is meant by relaying? >> >> Good point. Just to be pedantic all MTAs act as relays, but I think the >> term being talked about is "open relay" IOW it's "open" for anybody to >> use, spammers, guy next door etc. etc. > > Note that the OP is going to have something like 192.168.2.0/24 for > dc_relay_nets. Even if exim was listening on an external interface (an > empty dc_local_interfaces) exim is not set up to relay mail due to a > connection on this interface. > > And then we have the bedtime stories to frighten the children: hordes of > attempts to relay through a mail server. Like this one: > > 2014-10-06 07:19:44 H=114-43-21-85.dynamic.hinet.net (80.177.21.246) > [114.43.21.85] F=<sdf2...@hotmail.com> rejected RCPT > <sanjin...@yahoo.com.tw>: relay not permitted > 2014-10-06 07:19:45 unexpected disconnection while reading SMTP command from > 114-43-21-85.dynamic.hinet.net (80.177.21.246) [114.43.21.85] > > There is more chance of the 0's and 1's of my exim binary spontaneously > disassociating and reassembling into a copy of postfix than one of these > getting through. > >
And there are people who think that setting up an MTA correctly is easy, and then turn around and prove they have no idea what they're talking about. Jerry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543293c9.5010...@attglobal.net
