From owner-freebsd-isp Thu Jun 24 10:17: 9 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from complx.LF.net (complx.LF.net [195.206.130.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0881B14E60 for ; Thu, 24 Jun 1999 10:17:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pi@complx.LF.net) Received: by complx.LF.net (Smail3.2.0.103/complx.LF.net) via LF.net GmbH Internet Services from pi for freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG for host hub.FreeBSD.ORG id m10xD7U-000zySC; Thu, 24 Jun 1999 19:17:00 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: Subject: Re: why not uucp, instead of smtp and static ip? To: leifn@neland.dk (Leif Neland) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 19:16:59 +0200 (CEST) From: "Kurt Jaeger" Cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <00c901bebe64$f5267d60$0e00a8c0@neland.dk> from "Leif Neland" at Jun 24, 1999 07:13:32 PM X-NCC-RegID: de.oberon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hi! > I just wonder, when holding mail for a domain, which picks it up by dialin > and doing smtp/etrn, one almost is forced to issue static ip's. > > Why not use uucp? Is it just considered old-fashioned, nobody understands > how to set it up, or are there heavy reasons not to use uucp? All this. We still do it. It's a pain. -- MfG/Best regards, Kurt Jaeger 21 years to go ! LF.net GmbH pi@LF.net Oberon.net GmbH pi@oberon.net Vor dem Lauch 23 fon +49 711 90074-23 Friedrich-Ebert-Str.1 D-70567 Stuttgart fax +49 711 7289041 40210 Duesseldorf fon +49 211 179253-11 For Redmond: "nuke the site from orbit -- it's the only way to be sure." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message