Discuss Digest, Vol 2, Issue 31

[lug at the-leveys.us (Don Levey)]

discuss-bounces at blu.org wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 02:07:01PM -0500, Don Levey wrote:
>>>> Quite honestly, I'm a lot more bothered by these "reasonable"
>>>> limits on traffic volume and general no-server (ftp, web) policies
>>>> than I am by blocking of port 25 outbound.
>>>
>>> What's the difference?  You need the port unblocked to run a mail
>>> server...
>>
>> No, you don't.  Not outbound port 25, anyway.  Unless I'm imagining
>> it, my messages are coming through just fine from a server within
>> the RCN network. You can contact my server directly via *inbound*
>> port 25, and outbound I communicate with you via RCN's mail server.
>
> Well, then you're not really running your own mail server; i.e. you're
> dependent on someone else's mail server for your service ON YOUR END
> to work.  The whole point of our argument is that this should not be
> necessary.

Must be an illusion that's sitting on my desk, then.  And while it's not
necessarily a mail server, you're still relying on another machine at your
end to relay your traffic for you.  In fact, you're relying on your entire
ISP's infrastructure.  Now if you could fineigle a direct, hard-wired
connection to your destination each time you needed it...

 -Don