[130065] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Randy in Nevis
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Mon Sep 27 12:44:45 2010
To: Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 27 Sep 2010 09:30:06 PDT."
<4CA0C68E.2070501@orthanc.ca>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 12:44:04 -0400
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1285605844_7757P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 09:30:06 PDT, Lyndon Nerenberg said:
> I've heard from a couple of people that the PIX will remap 587 (and 25)
> to oddball ports if you fiddle the config just right. Given all the
> other bogosity that box does with SMTP I wonder if there's truth to the
> rumour. (I haven't found anyone who can reproduce this on demand, so
> it's still apocryphal for now.)
I've heard some people say that reproducing totally compliant SMTP behavior
on those boxes on demand is apocryphal as well. :)
(I have to admit I haven't actually tracked a user complaint down to a
misbehaving PIX in a year or two, but I can't say if the software has gotten
better or if its market share is just small enough to fly under my radar - the
type of people who send e-mail from behind a PIX don't interact with my users
all that often)
--==_Exmh_1285605844_7757P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQFMoMnUcC3lWbTT17ARAiRsAJ9Oqn481qbnll79vTWlOS+cS/tiuwCg2GBD
yMebnZvi4xysLKVU+xqHJ9Y=
=yVou
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1285605844_7757P--
