Scott Haneda wrote, at 05/01/2009 08:37 PM:
> On May 1, 2009, at 7:19 AM, Jorey Bump wrote:
>>
>> The difference is that MTAs typically don't quit if they can't verify
>> the cert (check it against a root certificate store), so using a
>> self-signed cert is adequate.
>>
# client TLS parameter
On May 1, 2009, at 7:19 AM, Jorey Bump wrote:
Scott Haneda wrote, at 04/30/2009 10:11 PM:
What happens is, under heavy MTA load on port 25, I will run out of
connection slots on port 25.
Have you investigated the nature of this problem?
Thoroughly. My current email server lacks control, it
On May 1, 2009, at 6:30 AM, Jorey Bump wrote:
Scott Haneda wrote, at 04/30/2009 10:31 PM:>
On Apr 24, 2009, at 9:43 PM, Jorey Bump wrote:
Since one of the purposes of the submission port is to support road
warriors, I feel it should be as secure as possible and the entire
communication should
Victor Duchovni wrote, at 05/01/2009 10:26 AM:
> On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 10:19:40AM -0400, Jorey Bump wrote:
FTR: No, I didn't! :)
>>> My end goal here is to get this all working, and then change these ports
>>> to, for example, 25 -> 2525 and 587 -> 587587 unless there is some other
>>> conventi
On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 10:19:40AM -0400, Jorey Bump wrote:
> > My end goal here is to get this all working, and then change these ports
> > to, for example, 25 -> 2525 and 587 -> 587587 unless there is some other
> > convention. I am going to put a anti spam proxy in front of all this.
>
There
Scott Haneda wrote, at 04/30/2009 10:11 PM:
> What happens is, under heavy MTA load on port 25, I will run out of
> connection slots on port 25.
Have you investigated the nature of this problem?
> By moving users to 587, I do not care
> about port 25 connection slots. MTA's will try again later
Scott Haneda wrote, at 04/30/2009 10:31 PM:>
> On Apr 24, 2009, at 9:43 PM, Jorey Bump wrote:
>>
>> Since one of the purposes of the submission port is to support road
>> warriors, I feel it should be as secure as possible and the entire
>> communication should be encrypted.
>
> I am in a bad spot
Jorey, thanks for your email also. Sorry for the delay, but you and
Barney have been hugely instrumental in getting me on track with this.
On Apr 24, 2009, at 9:43 PM, Jorey Bump wrote:
Scott Haneda wrote, at 04/24/2009 07:41 PM:
Thanks for this, this is getting me on track, comments intersp
Barney, ( and Jorey ), thanks so much for your help in understanding
this, moving to postfix is something I have needed to do for some
time, glad to finally get down to it. I had to step away for a few
days and get some other work done, but made some good progress last
night. I have some
Scott Haneda wrote, at 04/24/2009 07:41 PM:
> Thanks for this, this is getting me on track, comments interspersed
> below...
>
> On Apr 24, 2009, at 6:51 AM, Jorey Bump wrote:
>
>> Scott Haneda wrote, at 04/24/2009 07:58 AM:
>>
>>> I am a little confused about main.cf and master.cf. Is there ove
2009/4/25 Scott Haneda :
> I have a little affliction against man type pages, they never seem to make a
> lot of sense to me :) This section does though. Just to be clear, this is
> a full blown over-ride, in that deleting the corresponding value from
> main.cf would do nothing to the server, so
On Apr 24, 2009, at 4:50 PM, Larry Stone wrote:
On 4/24/09 6:41 PM, Scott Haneda at talkli...@newgeo.com wrote:
If you do not like a lack of TLS enforcement on the submission port
what do you suggest for users who just do not care enough to use any
TLS? You let them work on port 25? I could
On 4/24/09 6:41 PM, Scott Haneda at talkli...@newgeo.com wrote:
> If you do not like a lack of TLS enforcement on the submission port
> what do you suggest for users who just do not care enough to use any
> TLS? You let them work on port 25? I could go that route, but I am
> really trying to fin
Thanks for this, this is getting me on track, comments interspersed
below...
On Apr 24, 2009, at 6:51 AM, Jorey Bump wrote:
Scott Haneda wrote, at 04/24/2009 07:58 AM:
I am a little confused about main.cf and master.cf. Is there
overlap in
some of the settings? Do some settings exist in b
Scott Haneda wrote, at 04/24/2009 07:58 AM:
> I am a little confused about main.cf and master.cf. Is there overlap in
> some of the settings? Do some settings exist in both files, or at least
> are interchangable? If this is the case, under what conditions do you
> decide to do so?
>From master
Hello, mail_version = 2.5.5, Dovecot for pop and imap, myqsl as the
auth backend.
I am a little confused about main.cf and master.cf. Is there overlap
in some of the settings? Do some settings exist in both files, or at
least are interchangable? If this is the case, under what conditions
16 matches
Mail list logo
