On Mon, 27 Jun 2005, Marc Sherman wrote:
> I think Marc is referring to ISPs who require AUTH over ssmtp for their
> customers to submit mail. The customer could change to a different ISP, but
> I'd imagine that changing MTAs is often easier.
Any ISP that *requires* their customers to use an obsolete protocol that
was *never* a standard deserves to lost custom. Why aren't they
supporting AUTH over smtp with STARTTLS? That is the standard, and has
been for quite a few years now. I think all the major MTAs support it.
And no doubt clients in due course will stop supporting ssmtp. Or am I
indulging in wishful thinking here? Probably. The server support for
ssmtp in Exim has expanded over time because the clients don't/won't
change.
> Philip, would you accept a patch if someone else were to implement client side
> ssmtp?
I try always to look at patches because I think if someone has gone to
the trouble of submitting one, they deserve at least the courtesy of my
looking at what they have done. I don't always accept them.
Such a patch would need some careful specification. How would it
interact with hosts_avoid_tls, hosts_avoid_esmtp, and hosts_require_tls,
for instance? A hacked-up patch is likely to ignore that issue.
I suppose I'd be being inconsistent not to accept a suitable patch.
Grudgingly. :-)
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
Get the Exim 4 book: http://www.uit.co.uk/exim-book
