Re: POP3 Connector undisclosed recipients

Tech-Archive recommends: Fix windows errors by optimizing your registry

From: BC (bconneely_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 09/04/04 

Date: 3 Sep 2004 17:17:34 -0700

"Rich Matheisen [MVP]" <richnews@rmcons.com.NOSPAM.COM> wrote in message news:<j1mfj0tgur29q45e53itt0gs5rc5id90h4@4ax.com>...
> bconneely@yahoo.com (BC) wrote:
>
> [ snip ]
>
> >*Slap*
> >
> >How many times I have to tell you low tech MS toadies
>
> Low tech? MS toadies? And you still use POP3? HA!
>

Is that all you got? *Slap* *Slap*

I you want speed, reliability, and flexibility it's POP3
and IMAP. If you want weird, sluggish behavior and
incompatibility, there's MAPI, which of course is crappy

*Slap*

> >
> >that POP3 connectors work extremely well, expecially
>
> No they don't. At least not if you define "extremely well" as "the
> same as SMTP".

By "extremely well" I mean set-it and forget-it low
maintenance and low cost -- which are extremely strange
concepts to MCSE's who think the all-purpose solution to
flaky Exchange Servers is a massively expensive -- and
profitable -- software and hardware upgrade to Microsoft's
latest and lamest.

*Slap*

> >
> >for smaller businesses, where they provide extra
>
> The size of the business has no effect on how well they work.

Yahoo with 52 million customers might possibly have different
needs from a regional ISP with 50,000 customers, which in turn
might have different needs from a large company with 5,000
employees, whose needs would be different from a small firm
with 50 employees. In all these cases, though Exchange Server
would not be the best choice if speed, scalability, and
reliability are important.

*Slap*

> >
> >protection against viruses and hackers, compared to
>
> Really? Wow. I didn't know that POP3 included any AV scanners. MAybe
> I'll go back and reread that RFC. How you're proteted from hackers by
> this sort of software is also a mystery. But, I'm just a low tech MS
> toadie, so what do *I* know? Perhaps you can tell us how this
> wonderful POP3 "cloak of invincibility" works?

*Slap* Try reading the post first before responding. By having
the email come to a foreign mail host first, you can have it
scanned there first before pulling it down into your local
system.
 
>
> >*Slap*
> >
> >MX pointing, especially to that sorry-ass pile of
>
> What's having a MX record got to do with viruses or hackers? Is ther
> an "A" record? If so, then how's the two differ?

*Slap* See the previous response. And an extra *Slap* for
your disengenuousness.

> >
> >progamming code known as Exchange Server.
>
> You won't hear me disagree that no Exchange server shoud be connected
> to the Internet.

*Slap* It shouldn't even be connected to a large internal
network

> >There are some issues with some list server mailings
> >
> >*Slap*
> >
> >but mappings will take care of this. Also, you have
>
> Not if yu have al the mail delivered to a single mailbox.

*Slap* Read the manual or help file before making a dim
comment like. It works. Did it. Inconvenient with a large
number of list server mailings, but that's about it.

>
> >*Slap*
> >
> >the option of pulling down from now widely available
> >
> >*Slap*
> >
> >email hosting sites with antispam & antivirus checking
> >
> >*Slap*
> >
> >done at their end. Also, if this wasn't enough, some
>
> Which is, of course, free -- right? Gotta keep those small businesses
> in mind. But, there are better ways of doing this than some kludge of
> POP3-to-SMTP.

*Slap* Exchange Server *is* the kludge. The TCO of that easily
pays for having email being scanned externally.

>
> >*Slap*
> >
> >of the newer more advanced email servers (aka non-
> >
> >*Slap*
> >
> >Exchange) can optionally preserve the SMTP envelope.
>
> So Bcc: recipients are disclosed? Oh, yeah -- like that's a good
> thing!

*Slap* Not if you're using it as the domain pop3 collector.

>
> >*Kick ****
> >
> >Now go 'way and download some critical update or such.
>
> I'd rather go fiddle with Ironmail and Postfix, thanks.

"Fiddle" is the right word, no doubt. I'll skip a slap for
your inadvertent honesty.

-BC

Quantcast