On 10/14/2011 2:37 AM, Mark Goodge wrote: > FWIW, I agree with Peter here. The documentation should avoid using > terminology where the contemporary meaning is significantly different to > the traditional meaning, otherwise there will always be scope for > misunderstanding. > > I'd rewrite that last sentence to "This option should only be used on > mail servers which only provide outbound relaying to the Internet and do > not accept mail from the public Internet at all".
What you write above might be ok if all servers running a 587 daemon also did the smtp relaying to destination MXen. In many cases submission mail is routed to an anti-spam or intellectual property retention filter on another host, which then relays the mail to the destination MX. So your statement above is somewhat ambiguous as well. Additionally, the way you use "public Internet" could be confusing to a great many people, as "road warriors" and others submit mail to their organization's (corporations) submission server from the "public Internet". Thus, the wording of any change to the doc should probably reflect "policy" more than "location of submittter". I.e. "who" is relaying is probably more important there "where" they are attempting to relay from. After all, isn't the whole purpose of TLS and SASL to control "who" is allowed to submit, not necessarily from "where"? -- Stan
