From owner-freebsd-questions Mon Aug 18 07:43:16 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA25284 for questions-outgoing; Mon, 18 Aug 1997 07:43:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from iquest3.iquest.net (iquest3.iquest.net [209.43.20.203]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id HAA25279 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 1997 07:43:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 18277 invoked from network); 18 Aug 1997 14:43:11 -0000 Received: from glider.iquest.net (HELO drifter.iquest.net) (198.70.144.56) by iquest3.iquest.net with SMTP; 18 Aug 1997 14:43:11 -0000 Message-ID: <33F85F7B.167EB0E7@iquest.net> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 09:43:07 -0500 From: Jerry Kelley X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.1.5-RELEASE i386) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sthaug@nethelp.no CC: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sendmail on a firewall box References: <33F85122.41C67EA6@iquest.net> <2482.871912487@verdi.nethelp.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk sthaug@nethelp.no wrote: > > Well, the Whistle Interjet *is* a FreeBSD box :-). But it's hidden. > Yes, you can get much of the same functionality with ipfw or ipfilter. > It all depends on how much your own time is worth. Yes, I know. That's why I'm going to build my own! ;-) Besides, I enjoy working on FreeBSD boxes so that's why I'm doing this myself. If I didn't, I'd be using Windoze with the Interjet. Why pay Whistle and my ISP for something that I can put together much cheaper? I spoke with the folks at Whistle some time back and they seem pretty aloof at this point. They're attitude is that they have enough people interested in their product that they don't really care too much about more customers. I was trying to find out how I could get them to work with my ISP and they essentially stated that they have enough ISP's at this point and weren't interested in any more. So, I'm on my own here. The Interjet is a neat idea but the marketing plan seems inadequate. Besides, I'm not so sure that their product is very stable yet. Given that, I'd rather have the flexibility of working 'under the hood' myself since I have the programming and system knowledge necessary. > > A fairly common way to do this is SMAP (from the TIS toolkit) plus > sendmail. I doubt you'll find many people serious about security who > will want to go for sendmail alone. > Ok, thanks. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jerry Kelley jerryk@iquest.net "Expectations are life's greatest dangers."