On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 06:35:38AM -0500, Alan DeKok wrote:
Hadmut Danisch <hadmut(_at_)danisch(_dot_)de> wrote:
The reason is simple: It's mainly the POP account.
People need to exchange e-mail from virtually anywhere,
whether from home with a dynamically allocated IP address,
of from any phone plug in a hotel right in the middle of nowhere,
with an IP address of any local ISP. That's OK, I agree with that.
I do it the same way.
Let me re-phrase that:
"People need to be able to send email from anywhere, to anyone,
using any email address they choose."
No. You re-phrase it to the opposite.
I said: exchange from anywhere with any IP address. I didn't say
"send" in the context of SMTP. And I didn't say send to anybody.
I meant: Exchange e-mail with my home mail hub to download incoming
mail and to upload outgoing mail. No IP traffic with any other machine
at all, so the local IP address doesn't matter in any way.
- Many ISPs deny to support their clients in mail delivery.
Many do. And other's will follow once symmetry is defined as a standard.
- Even if they do, most clients deny to use it.
Most clients don't deny it, they just don't use it because they don't
know it. No denial, just poor configuration.
- Instead, clients insist on directly deliver their email
to the world through SMTP without any authorization/authentication.
Too bad. I can't drive 200 MPH on city streets, much as I may like
to.
Huh? What are you talking about???
There are technical solutions to this problem. Authenticated SMTP
exists, and should be used.
Yes, but how does that fit to your former statement?
Maybe you're confusing authenticated SMTP a little bit?
Hadmut
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg