Deathless prose
2005-10-25 16:13I'm preparing a document that gives advice on sending email from within Cambridge University. The aim is to correct some confusion about the difference between our message submission server and our smart host, which has not mattered much in the past but will when we disable unauthenticated access to the former. I'm also documenting the forthcoming rate limiting restrictions.
Any comments or questions are welcomed. It'll be announced properly in due course...
http://www.cus.cam.ac.uk/~fanf2/hermes/doc/misc/sending-from-cudn.txt
Any comments or questions are welcomed. It'll be announced properly in due course...
http://www.cus.cam.ac.uk/~fanf2/hermes/doc/misc/sending-from-cudn.txt
no subject
Date: 2005-10-25 16:36 (UTC)(S)
no subject
Date: 2005-10-25 16:38 (UTC)Nitpicking here - as gmail have changed to googlemail in the UK (at least for new users of the service) and we are in the UK should you have smtp.googlemail.com instead of smtp.gmail.com?
http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=13285 - shows that they recommend this (at least for thunderbird, I haven't checked other clients).
http://mail.google.com/mail/help/intl/en-GB/googlemail.html
What level of user is your document aimed at?
no subject
Date: 2005-10-25 16:49 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-25 17:00 (UTC)Perhaps include a description of what our/a smart host does, for people who don't know?
no subject
Date: 2005-10-25 17:10 (UTC)For extra foul-and-perversity points:
& have a small applet on the web server that probes to see which ports are visable (and with which you can starttls and get the right certificate). You could then say "roaming users should go to http://message-submission-on-every-port.camacuk/whatports.html and do what it tells them."
(I use this trick to my sshd from behind random firewalls)
Finally, a pedant point:
no subject
Date: 2005-10-25 17:12 (UTC)*although I can imagine some of my users' college unix machines running enough compute and cron jobs that they might hit 60 messages in an hour
if they are unlucky.
no subject
Date: 2005-10-25 17:52 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-25 19:55 (UTC)What can I say? I'm old fashioned.
no subject
Date: 2005-10-25 20:42 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-26 08:38 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-26 10:04 (UTC)See, for example, the opening paragraph of section 3.1.
For the record, I think this is an amusing discussion that is irrelevant to Tony's document: "a header" rather than "the header" is a friendlier term for a document aimed at non-pedants; but if the document is aimed at those with an eye for detail then 2822 makes your position unassailable.
no subject
Date: 2005-10-26 10:15 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-26 20:23 (UTC)Regarding your pedant point, it is incorrect regardless of any 2822/822 terminological controversy. My servers record the authenticated user in two places in the message header: in the Sender: field in the usual way, and in a Received: field as a pair of the SASL mechanism and user name.