[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] configuring message submission port
From: |
Paul Fox |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] configuring message submission port |
Date: |
Thu, 20 Nov 2014 19:14:33 -0500 |
okay -- i can accept all that.
but at the least the documentation needs to keep up. mts.conf.man,
mh-tailor, the FAQ, should all mention that the basic client
connectivity has changed.
paul
ken wrote:
> >i've just build/installed latest git. now that post defaults to port
> >587, i'm wondering how to configure the port number back to 25. i've
> >found the -port option to send and post, but no mention of a means
> >to configure this in mts.conf.
>
> Well, I guess our thinking was you could always configure this in
> your .mh_profile, e.g.:
>
> send: -port 25
>
> We've been getting away with putting stuff in mts.conf ... and I'll be
> honest, the idea of writing more code to parse entries in mts.conf really
> does not appeal to me.
>
> >the error, when attempting to send a message, is:
> >
> > post: problem initializing server; [BHST] no servers available
> > send: message not delivered to anyone
> >
> >which isn't particularly indicative that it's actually the default
> >port that's changed.
>
> If you add -snoop, the errors become more verbose:
>
> What now? send -server localhost -snoop
> Trying to connect to "localhost" ...
> Connecting to ::1:587...
> Connection failed: Connection refused
> Connecting to 127.0.0.1:587...
> Connection failed: Connection refused
> Connecting to fe80::1%lo0:587...
> Connection failed: Connection refused
> post: problem initializing server; [BHST] no servers available
> send: message not delivered to anyone
>
> In true nmh fashion, this was also the subject of a discussion here:
>
> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/nmh-workers/2009-01/msg00009.html
>
> >if adding a port specifier (does it need to be per-server?) to
> >mts.conf is too hard, perhaps the "mts" parameter should gain a new
> >"submission" alternative, which would always imply port 587. "smtp"
> >would continue to imply port 25.
>
> My thinking is that if we're going to go that route, we really should
> simply make the port number be configurable; we had a user who wanted
> to speak SMTP on port 80 (yeah, I thought it was strange).
>
> >(i've configured my local postfix listen on 587, so things are
> >working, but it seems there's a documentation (or functionality) piece
> >missing in MH.)
>
> The problem is that there are more and more knobs you can adjust when it
> comes to message submission (c.f. SASL, TLS, authentication, etc etc).
> I don't think it makes sense to put those all in mts.conf. Once you've
> come to that realization then it's not very far to get to the point of
> not adding any new features to mts.conf and stick with .mh_profile
> customization for the vast majority of things. This was sort-of hashed
> out this July:
>
> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/nmh-workers/2014-07/msg00000.html
>
> --Ken
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nmh-workers mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
=----------------------
paul fox, address@hidden (arlington, ma, where it's 29.7 degrees)
- [Nmh-workers] configuring message submission port, Paul Fox, 2014/11/20
- Re: [Nmh-workers] configuring message submission port, Ken Hornstein, 2014/11/20
- Re: [Nmh-workers] configuring message submission port,
Paul Fox <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] configuring message submission port, Ken Hornstein, 2014/11/20
- Re: [Nmh-workers] configuring message submission port, Bill Wohler, 2014/11/23
- [Nmh-workers] MH FAQ update, Bill Wohler, 2014/11/23
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH FAQ update, Bill Wohler, 2014/11/23
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH FAQ update, Ralph Corderoy, 2014/11/23
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH FAQ update, Ken Hornstein, 2014/11/23
Re: [Nmh-workers] configuring message submission port, Lyndon Nerenberg, 2014/11/20
Re: [Nmh-workers] configuring message submission port, Peter Davis, 2014/11/20
Re: [Nmh-workers] configuring message submission port, Paul Fox, 2014/11/20