From owner-freebsd-current Sun Sep 26 10: 1:17 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from noop.colo.erols.net (noop.colo.erols.net [207.96.1.150]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9075614BE4 for ; Sun, 26 Sep 1999 10:01:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gjp@noop.colo.erols.net) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=noop.colo.erols.net) by noop.colo.erols.net with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 11VHg3-000GdN-00; Sun, 26 Sep 1999 13:01:31 -0400 To: Brian Somers Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG From: "Gary Palmer" Subject: Re: On hub.freebsd.org refusing to talk to dialups In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 26 Sep 1999 12:12:00 BST." <199909261112.MAA23799@keep.lan.Awfulhak.org> Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 13:01:25 -0400 Message-ID: <63944.938365285@noop.colo.erols.net> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG 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