![]() |
Please add SMTP setting to accounts |
Post Reply
|
| Author | |
Vecdid
Professional
Joined: 29 Mar 2011 Posts: 51 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Topic: Please add SMTP setting to accountsPosted: 30 Jul 2011 at 6:43am |
|
ROTFL, did your parents beat you, a bully toss you in the locker daily, whew, some serious issues here, thanks for all the great advice lol, you missed my point, way over your head and that sure has been one long winded answer, I am done with post, would love to see this feature. And switeman I hope whatever bothers you in life gets better.
|
|
![]() |
|
swhiteman
Expert
Joined: 13 Mar 2008 Location: NYNY Posts: 258 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 28 Jul 2011 at 9:59pm |
|
"I don't use it as a email server in any way"... and that's important why, exactly? If you are worried about "spoofing," that can only be because you are acting as an untrusted, unauthenticated, unauthorized smtp-sender (RFCspeak, get used to it) which means that your reputation and authentication will be based on heuristics such as the roundtrip check, DNSBLs, et al. and your authorization determined by SPF, SID, et al.
Every such technology relates to smtp-senders which do not use methods that supersede heuristic authentication and authorization, such as SMTP AUTH, IP-based whitelisting on the smtp-receiver, or client certs. Whether you're "a[n] email server" (smtp-receiver) is immaterial. You either [1] are worried about your smtp-sender reputation because you are implicitly untrusted, or [2] you've been lying, because you wouldn't care at all about "spoofing" or "spam filters" if you were an explicitly trusted SMTP client. Someday you'll stop exaggerating your knowledge and the people you work with will be happier; you might be sadder, though, because of all that hard wo -- ah, who am I kidding with this? IT is a very comfortable place for serial impersonators. Y'all sound the same: moving the goalposts whenever gaps in knowledge are about to be found out, changing the objectives and background as it suits you, coughing up buzzwords you don't understand but which divert us into double-checking our own knowledge, and the classic endgame "You know nothing about my totally super-secret optimized clubhouse, so STFU, because every decision I've made is perfect for me, even though I previously acted like they were general best practices." Of course, a well person would find it easier to just learn the technology, but an impersonator gets off on the cat-and-mouse of dodging their eventual unmasking more than they ever get into the tech side. They actually prefer to be on the run, actually enjoy everyone wondering when they'll get found out, because they know their ever-mutable reality is always an escape hatch. 'Scool though, keep on doing what you're doing, nothing new here, Dr. Hare has been down with this for a while. With no irony, I'm sure your approach will serve you well and you'll move up in the ranks faster than less socially "adept" folks (but just know you're not putting one over on all of them).
Edited by swhiteman - 29 Jul 2011 at 4:07am |
|
![]() |
|
Vecdid
Professional
Joined: 29 Mar 2011 Posts: 51 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 28 Jul 2011 at 6:17am |
|
You forget to ask, my config, my client's config and how I use email2db, I don't use it as a email server in any way, anyway, thanks for all the great info, have a great day. I hope to see this feature added in a future release of Email2DB. Edited by Vecdid - 28 Jul 2011 at 6:35am |
|
![]() |
|
swhiteman
Expert
Joined: 13 Mar 2008 Location: NYNY Posts: 258 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 28 Jul 2011 at 3:08am |
|
C'mon, stuff the diagrams and other nonsense that do nothing but disprove your point. Did you read the RFC? Been using SPF for how long again? Are you actually just trolling now?
I never said I know "everything about everything." I know what I know, though. After years of working in high-volume messaging, I know nearly everything there is to know about SMTP -- whereas you are confused about SPF yet are curiously (maliciously?) intent on spreading BS into Google. If anybody at support told you that an SPF record can preclude the use of one sending IP by multiple domains, they are confused, too. (BTW, ParkerSoft are not e-mail experts, they are middleware pros. The SMTP client components are licensed, off-the-shelf software.) If you are a troll, I'm sure you're getting off on making me recite this, but SPF is a forward DNS record used to manage (allow and deny) the use of envelope sender domains by Internet hosts. SPF allows the owner of a domain to dictate, to those smtp-receivers who understand SPF, whether mail claiming to be from a given domain may be emitted by the smtp-sender host. This verification takes place using a variety of lookup methods, including (but not limited to) a hard-coded list of IPs/subnets, a PTR lookup on the connecting IP to match on a PTR pattern, an MX lookup (and corresponding A lookup) on the sender domain, and the inclusion of other domains' SPF records for supplementary lookups. There is in fact no SPF mechanism that you can add to your domain that prohibits the appearance of that same mechanism in other, unknown domains' SPF records; in other words, you cannot have an SPF record that prevents mail from being emitted by a host that is configured to serve other domains. If you have an spf ip4 mech that says that mail from your domain example.com can only come from 1.2.3.4, that says that any other IP address can't send mail from your domain. It does not mean that 1.2.3.4 cannot also appear in the SPF record for otherexample.com or somerandomdomain.com. The same goes for any other mechanism. If you have an SPF ptr mech that says the emitting IP must have a PTR matching example.com, that does not mean that somerandomdomain.com cannot also have a ptr mech with exactly the same requirement. The SPF record cannot say "...and also exclude any host that serves any other domain." And SPF's include mech, as I noted before, specifically is designed to allow sharing SPF mechs across multiple domains (i.e. domains which emit mail from the same hosts). You are mixing up a method of locking down a domain's smtp-senders to specific hosts with an (imaginary) method that restricts which, or how many, domains a specific host can serve. If you are sending mail from a given domain, your smtp-sender needs to be permitted by SPF (if there's a record). Once that's accomplished -- and it certainly needs to be accomplished to deliver mail reliably -- you will not be accused of "spoofing" if you send mail from another domain using the same smtp-sender. The main reason you will not be accused of "spoofing" is there is no way for the smtp-receiver to know you serve other domains. But even if there were a source of such information, as long as all DNS and SMTP configs were in order for each domain, the fact that there are multiple serviced domains is immaterial. Let me teach you what is most essential to reliably send from a given smtp-sender, with or without SPF in play. You need to pass the HELO-PTR-A roundtrip check. This means your smtp-sender's IP must have a PTR record. This PTR record must mach the SMTP HELO hostname the sender uses in its greeting. The PTR record must have a corresponding A or CNAME record that leads back to the sending IP. Any failure in any part of the roundtrip will endanger your ability to deliver mail. One popular mail server product, some time ago, had a major problem with the roundtrip. See, it allowed you to send mail from multiple domains via the same outbound IP, but it would alter the HELO hostname accordingly. So if you sent from user@example.com, the HELO would be smtp.example.com. If you sent from user2@example.com, the HELO would be smtp.example2.com. One of those e-mails has to fail the roundtrip, because the IP can only have one PTR (practically speaking, smtp-receivers do not parse multiple PTRs). Either the PTR matches one, or it matches the other, but not both. (The solution, added to the software several years ago, is to bind a single HELO hostname to every IP, regardless of which domain the mail was coming from.) This is one kind of situation which was commonly misinterpreted with the FUD "Oh noes, I can't use the same server to send mail from multiple domains." The FUD conclusion isn't true at all. You just have to pass the roundtrip for each e-mail you emit. If you can't do that, you will have a problem, but that has nothing to do with serving multiple domains. It has to do with knowing how to configure your systems, and this means you have to know when to replace some software with others. It is not unlikely that your Email2DB server was actually failing the roundtrip and you didn't know what to fix because you are new to this area. You should stop now -- unless you are just a troll, of course. I told you I agree with your feature request (though for other reasons) and it's best that you don't try to find any more diagrams. Edited by swhiteman - 28 Jul 2011 at 6:08am |
|
![]() |
|
Vecdid
Professional
Joined: 29 Mar 2011 Posts: 51 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 27 Jul 2011 at 8:25pm |
|
The SPF comment, was right from Parker Software, when we started having issues.My god, calm down, maybe you don't know everything about everything and should not just attack people nothing here is "new" to me, here is an example: http://i.zdnet.com/blogs/spf-system.png?tag=mantle_skin%3bcontent .
RFC4408: Whatever we disagree on it really doesn't matter, we both agree this would be a nice feature for whatever reason. I have several clients having issues. Since I have it going to their proper smtp servers, no issues. Could be a another reason for all I know, I sure do not know everything,let alone the clients config, we do not control our client's dns or email servers for the most part, so simple fix would be to be able to apply SMTP settings per account, which right now can only happen on the trigger level. No reason to talk down to someone in any way. So take a valium or something and smile
Edited by Vecdid - 27 Jul 2011 at 8:43pm |
|
![]() |
|
swhiteman
Expert
Joined: 13 Mar 2008 Location: NYNY Posts: 258 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 27 Jul 2011 at 6:41pm |
|
You shouldn't go around shouting out technologies that are new to you. SPF places absolutely no restriction on the number of domains that can emit mail from a single host. The very existence of the SPF include mechanism contradicts this claim (as do many other examples from real life).
SASL is irrelevant to your point.
Ask ISPs providing business e-mail how many outbound gateway IPs they have (it's not one per domain!). I can tell you what configuration an outbound host actually needs to have the best chance of delivery, because I've worked for multiple managed anti-spam companies. But you need to stop spreading FUD first. |
|
![]() |
|
Vecdid
Professional
Joined: 29 Mar 2011 Posts: 51 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 27 Jul 2011 at 4:29pm |
|
SPF...
SASL...
Edited by Vecdid - 27 Jul 2011 at 4:29pm |
|
![]() |
|
swhiteman
Expert
Joined: 13 Mar 2008 Location: NYNY Posts: 258 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 25 Jul 2011 at 5:59pm |
|
Sorry, your claim about e-mail spoofing is not valid.
No modern anti-spam technology rejects mail because it comes from an outbound SMTP host that does not correspond (CNAME or MX) to the envelope sender domain. Having an outbound-only SMTP gateway serve multiple sender domains is not only commonplace but is to be encouraged. (Please don't argue this point in public , as you will (a) lose the argument and (b) be spreading FUD on Google with every post. If you want to contest it, feel free to PM me. I will tell you how sender verification methods actually work and what you might actually be seeing.) It wouldn't be worth pursuing the feature for this fallacious reason. However, there is a much more valid reason for this feature, namely load balancing/binding per account, and I agree that it should be added. |
|
![]() |
|
Vecdid
Professional
Joined: 29 Mar 2011 Posts: 51 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 25 Jul 2011 at 4:14pm |
|
Need a way to set a different SMTP account per account. I know this can be set on each trigger if you use the send email action but with an account with 100s of triggers this is a pain, plus we have a script action that sends the email we do not even use the send email tab as we need to do some magic on the MSG_FromName. Having to use the same smtp server for muliple domains, in the head in the outgoing mail it looks like a spoofed email, which can and has been triggering spam filters.
|
|
![]() |
|
Post Reply
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |