Re: Confusing part of Docs

2011-10-14 Thread Wietse Venema
Mark Goodge: > On 14/10/2011 08:13, Peter wrote: > > > > ...and when someone comes into the #postfix IRC channel (like they did > > earlier today) seeking help because they read that last sentence in the > > docs and thought, "I have a dedicated server, I should set that to > > 'enforce'." and I lo

Re: Confusing part of Docs

2011-10-14 Thread Stan Hoeppner
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 l

Re: Confusing part of Docs

2011-10-14 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 14.10.2011 08:58, schrieb Stan Hoeppner: > On 10/13/2011 10:04 PM, Peter wrote: > >> This is what I (and I think most people) understand "dedicated server" >> to mean. There must be a better term for this that is less confusing. > > This is a result of your limited background and education

Re: Confusing part of Docs

2011-10-14 Thread Mark Goodge
On 14/10/2011 08:13, Peter wrote: ...and when someone comes into the #postfix IRC channel (like they did earlier today) seeking help because they read that last sentence in the docs and thought, "I have a dedicated server, I should set that to 'enforce'." and I looked at that section of the docs

Re: Confusing part of Docs

2011-10-14 Thread Peter
On 14/10/11 19:58, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > This is a result of your limited background and education Peter. The > term "server" was used to describe a software program's role long before > hardware companies adopted the word "server" to describe a class of > machines. You don't know me or my backg

Re: Confusing part of Docs

2011-10-13 Thread Stan Hoeppner
On 10/13/2011 10:04 PM, Peter wrote: > This is what I (and I think most people) understand "dedicated server" > to mean. There must be a better term for this that is less confusing. This is a result of your limited background and education Peter. The term "server" was used to describe a softwar

Re: Confusing part of Docs

2011-10-13 Thread Peter
On 14/10/11 15:51, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > On the public internet you can't force remote SMTP servers to use > encryption when connecting to your server, because very few, if any, > public SMTP servers implement outbound encryption in this way. Most > send in plain text, and always have. For insta

Re: Confusing part of Docs

2011-10-13 Thread Stan Hoeppner
On 10/13/2011 9:24 PM, Peter wrote: > from postconf(5) for smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt: > >> Mandatory TLS encryption: announce STARTTLS support to SMTP >> clients, and require that clients use TLS encryption. According to >> RFC 2487 this MUST NOT be applied in case of a publicly-referenc

Confusing part of Docs

2011-10-13 Thread Peter
from postconf(5) for smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt: > Mandatory TLS encryption: announce STARTTLS support to SMTP > clients, and require that clients use TLS encryption. According to > RFC 2487 this MUST NOT be applied in case of a publicly-referenced > SMTP server. Instead, this option shou