implementing SPF, which milter?

Glenn Steen glenn.steen at
Fri Mar 2 09:51:16 CET 2007

On 02/03/07, Hugo van der Kooij <hvdkooij at> wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Michael Choo wrote:
> > thanks. However the users that travel and are affected are senior management
> > with no clue.
> > the only thing they can do is raise lots of fuss about mails being rejected
> > by their clients.
> >
> > I think i'll try the port 587 solution and see how that goes.
> Pardon me. But if they send message directly to clients and they get
> rejected their admins should get a smack on the head for not building a
> proper infrastructure.
> These people, like everyone else in the company, should deliver their mail
> through the company network. They should be given VPN access to their own
> office so they can do this sort of things the right way.
Arhum, this isn't technology. It is policy. Different
companies/organizations will have very different policies, depending
on need. Not that I really dissagree;-). Personally I see to it that
mail is only accessible via some form of VPN.
But that is based on our policy;-).

> However solutions like this come with a price tag and sometimes the same
> persons who do not wish to pay for a proper infrastructure are the most
> profound in spitting their anger for getting the results of a poor
> infrastructure.

If they're cheap, there actually is a very workable solution for
SSL-VPN, namely SSL-Explorer ( It'll give either
RAT-access, or some form of proxied webmail access (we use it for
OWA... And we actually bought an enterprise license too, to get at the
enhanced authentication methods (RADIUS mainly))

> Just tell them internet is like a battlefield. (Well it is in fact.) So if
> they go out without proper protection they are likely to get themselves in
> a fix out there.
Oh yes.

> As usual admins are the people who get stuck between a rock and a hard
> place in these discussions.
See it as an opportunity to ask for more money in next periods budget;-).

-- Glenn
email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com
work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se

More information about the MailScanner mailing list