Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 13:01:25 -0400 From: "Gary Palmer" <gjp@in-addr.com> To: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: On hub.freebsd.org refusing to talk to dialups Message-ID: <63944.938365285@noop.colo.erols.net> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 26 Sep 1999 12:12:00 BST." <199909261112.MAA23799@keep.lan.Awfulhak.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brian Somers wrote in message ID <199909261112.MAA23799@keep.lan.Awfulhak.org>: > > I have some experience (from anti-spam mailing lists) of ISP's who > > are quite prepared to open port 25 for customers who ask. This is > > very good; SMTP has no authentication at all, and it is this > > "free-for-all" feature that spammers abuse. However - with a view > [.....] > > I belive sendmail-8.10 will have smtp authentication built in. > There's an rfc too (2554) but I can't say that they're the same thing > for sure. There are two `standards' from SMTP Auth out there ... one by Netscape (which is that rfc), and one by M$. To date, only Netscape 4.5 and higher (I believe), and products from Software.com (i.e. InterMail) support the netscape version (although I haven't looked in a few months, so I could be wrong). M$ Exchange and Outlook and so on support the M$ version of SMTP Auth, although I've been told that the two use different commands so (in theory) you can support both on the same box, althgouh I don't know of anyone planning or doing that. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?63944.938365285>