Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date:  Wed, 4 Mar 2009 12:14:10 -0800
From:  Andrew Marentis <amarentis (at mark)>
Subject:  [coba-e:15187] Re: Enable additional SMTP port
To:  coba-e (at mark)
Message-Id:  <fb0a8c090903041214u5cab83c7tbd8898627b33bb1d (at mark)>
In-Reply-To:  <1d4c951a0903041156m6add2541j41c6a7408938e2ae (at mark)>
References:  <1d4c951a0903041137s30d532b2sf298df6d57b52a8a (at mark)>	 <fb0a8c090903041148k67a1cf2x46f724438c4390c9 (at mark)>	 <1d4c951a0903041156m6add2541j41c6a7408938e2ae (at mark)>
X-Mail-Count: 15187

If you create a special case sendmail configuration for this situation and
name it something that is not on the norm. then when  the updates are done
they will not touch this special case do to the special naming convention.
but it needs to be started seprately from the standard sendmail
configuration. So it is it own inpendant item. i.e. sendmail_remote

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Jeff Keller <jeff (at mark)> wrote:

> Most users prefer not to have a different email workflow when travelling
> with their laptop and some simply don't want to use their ISP's mail server
> because dealing with the ISP can be a chore.
> Authentication still uses port 25/587 and is unfortunately blocked as well.
> I can setup additional SMTP ports in sendmail, but wasn't sure if there was
> a method of doing this without loosing the settings after a mail-related yum
> update.
> JK
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Andrew Marentis <amarentis (at mark)>wrote:
>> Webmail  for remote users or set to authenticate before sending email
>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Jeff Keller <jeff (at mark)> wrote:
>>> We've all had to support customers who cannot use our servers for
>>> outbound SMTP mail due to ISP port 25 & 587 filtering and although we often
>>> tell them to use their ISP's mail server, this creates hassles for
>>> non-technical users who travel with their laptop.
>>> I'd like to enable an alternate port (say 2525 for example?) to
>>> circumvent this issue.  What's the easiest way to do that without creating a
>>> config that gets overwritten by future BQ updates?
>>> JK


15187_2.html (attatchment)(tag is disabled)