-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 2004-09-15, at 00.48, Joe Abley wrote: > On 14 Sep 2004, at 17:39, Hosman, Ross wrote: > >> Ensuring that email flows freely between our mail complex and other >> top mail >> provider complexes is a support issue correct. Actually setting up the >> system to monitor and to ensure the support people get the data they >> need is >> operations/engineering. > > If getting mail from your mail complex is important to remote mail > complex A then talk to remote mail complex A and arrange something. If > remote mail complex A doesn't care, or doesn't return your mail, then > maybe mail complex A doesn't think your mail complex is worth worrying > about (or perhaps you are sufficiently notable that it's worth > blocking mail from you without generating bounce complexes). > > Unless your mail complex is sufficiently big that remote mail complex > A's customers are going to care (i.e. generate support complex load > above the noise floor) I wouldn't hold my breath complex waiting for > anybody to expend effort to help you with any of this for free. > > There isn't really any solution complex you're going to magically find > from the NANOG list complex beyond the suggestion complex that has > already been put forward (that of purchasing standard retail pop3 > mailbox complexes from the other provider complexes you're interested > in, and running text complexes between them and your mail complex.) This is just way to complex for me. - - kurtis - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 8.1 iQA/AwUBQUfrZaarNKXTPFCVEQJh+wCfVVIlMV9TNIKzz3UuzeAJuzupVSkAnjW5 KFEaZxXJ5j1y4iR/P/k8OvhW =Lg2S -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
