Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 12:18:41 -0400 From: Mark Conway Wirt <mark@intrepid.net> To: Bryan Bunch <bryanb@walls-media.com>, "Mike Avery (on the road)" <mavery@mail.otherwhen.com>, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: why not uucp, instead of smtp and static ip? Message-ID: <19990625121841.R14126@intrepid.net> In-Reply-To: <000401bebf19$d3e5e860$3a7e060c@ntwksbry.walls-media.com>; from Bryan Bunch on Fri, Jun 25, 1999 at 09:48:46AM -0500 References: <27FC8C472BE@mail.otherwhen.com> <000401bebf19$d3e5e860$3a7e060c@ntwksbry.walls-media.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jun 25, 1999 at 09:48:46AM -0500, Bryan Bunch wrote: > We currently use ETRN to handle e-mail for customers who use dialup > and want to manage their own e-mail accounts. The short of it is > this, you set up your mail server so that their mail is queued on > your mail server. When thet get back online, the exchange server > initiates ETRN and asks your mail server for the queued mail. We do > not have to deal with any static IP's for these customers. A vanilla implementation of ETRN will only trigger the delivery of the mail. It then consults DNS to see where is is delivered. Maybe they've improved the implementation in Exchange or Notes (or sendmail, for that matter) recently, but in the past a static IP was required because sendmail would automatically query DNS to find the highest preference MX server. --Mark To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990625121841.R14126>