Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 10:39:11 -0400 From: Mark Conway Wirt <mark@intrepid.net> To: "Mike Avery (on the road)" <mavery@mail.otherwhen.com>, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: why not uucp, instead of smtp and static ip? Message-ID: <19990625103911.D14126@intrepid.net> In-Reply-To: <27FC8C472BE@mail.otherwhen.com>; from Mike Avery (on the road) on Fri, Jun 25, 1999 at 08:39:19AM -0000 References: <19990624195332.F1893@daemon.ninth-circle.org>; <19990625085803.A14126@intrepid.net> <27FC8C472BE@mail.otherwhen.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jun 25, 1999 at 08:39:19AM -0000, Mike Avery (on the road) wrote:
>
> If someone is running Exchange, Lotus Notes, Groupwise,
> Sendmail, or even Mercury, they are trying to run their own email
> services. And it would seem to be easiest if they have a fixed IP
> address.
>
> Even if you can remap the IP address for mail.mycustomer.com in
> DNS on the fly, the changes will take a while to propogate.... it
> seems better to give these people a static IP, even if it is a pain.
>
> Or - do you have a better solution?
Something like UUCP is a better solution. I can run the primary (and
only) MX for the domain and spool it up via UUCP. [UUCP over TCP is the
way to go, BTW].
Why is this better?:
1) No need for static addresses.
2) No potentially confusing "Unable to deliver..." messages if the
customer doesn't retrieve their mail for a long time.
--Mark
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990625103911.D14126>