[Lvlug] Mail Handling Recommendations
Fri, 24 Nov 2000 14:30:57 -0500
This is helpful -- confusing but helpful, so I'm going to summarize some
of what I think I've heard, and add a few more questions.
It sounds like I might need two domain names -- one to support IMAP mail
for my home LAN, and a second if I want to have a domain name to support
"portable" web sites on external hosting services?
What is the most economical way you've found to get domain names?
If I had a port redirector would I still need the domain name (or a
static IP) to support the IMAP mail?
If I set up the IMAP mail, are you familiar with tools to accomplish the
full text search that I mentioned in my first post?
Aside: IPRoute has worked well for me. When I've gone to Steve Gibson's
SpinRite site to check my security, it can find no sign of my
computers. I'm now going to the IPRoute site to see if it can do port
redirection. I have a vague recollection that it might, but then I will
have to "open" the appropriate ports. I've tried that before to play
Civilization over the Internet and was not successful. If I attempt it
again, I may show you the typical commands and seek your advice on
modifying them -- IPRoute does not provide much in the way of
documentation of their command syntax.
I appreciate you taking the time to answer these questions!
No comments below!
Tom Walsh wrote:
> > Well, the value of this would be the ability to use IMAP without leaving
> > mail on my ISP's server. On my own server (as you do) I could store 4
> > GB (or more) without impacting my ISP. Then, as you stated, my wife,
> > son, and myself (all on the private network) could all access the mail
> > on that box via IMAP. But, the tunneling part scares me (sounds like a
> > lot to learn). Are you sure I'd have to tunnel?
> Yup, this would be the only way to do it if you want to keep that box
> (that is behaving as your gateway) running MSDOS. Actually, I seriously
> wonder if the MSDOS program is sophisticated enough to do NAT with Port
> > Right now we have three computers behind the gateway. One box, my
> > wife's, serves as the main mail machine in the sense that the directory
> > that stores the mail on that machine is shared on the network (LAN) so
> > Netscape on the other machines can access it. Any one of the machines
> > behind the gateway can surf the Internet and can download email from the
> > ISP, without "tunneling" -- IPRoute uses something they call NAT --
> Okay, there is a misconception brewing here, Fetching mail has nothing
> to do with you having a mail server, it is only getting mail from
> another server. In order to provide a mail service from a machine on
> your own network, you need the co-operation of the ISP and an Internet
> Domain of your own (or a static IP from the ISP that they would assign
> to you). Mail servers have names (e.g. mail.cyberiansoftware.com), you
> can have the ISP act as a forwarding agent (lower level preference mail
> handler for your domain) and the ISP mail system will spool the mail
> until such time as it can contact your mail server to deliver the items
> that are being held.
> > there are apparently two slightly different things related to networking
> > both called NAT. (Just to finish the story, when any of the other
> > machines downloads the mail, it is stored on the shared directory on my
> > wife's computer.) (PS: I buy very cheap systems, way behind the price
> > curve -- most of the machines I have now use TX Pro II motherboards and
> > Cyrix, AMD, or Wintek CPUs, ranging from 120 to 300 mhz.)
> > Couldn't Qmail, in a box behind the gateway, send / receive IMAP email
> > to my ISP over "NAT", just the way my other machines send and receive
> > POP3 email through the gateway?
> > Oh, wait, <lightbulb turns on> maybe that's the same thing you are
> > saying, maybe the thing I call NAT is the same as (or a variety of)
> > masquerading?
> Under linux we have Network Address Translation provided by the ipchains
> firewall. All that NAT does is allow machines that are on a private
> network (non-valid Internet IP addresses) have access to the 'net. NAT
> deliberately mangles the port / socket numbers of the packets passing
> through NAT so that you cannot run a service thru NAT. What you need is
> a Port Redirector, this is an entirely different animal which is in no
> way related to NAT.
> Tom Walsh - WN3L - Embedded Systems Consultant
> 'www.openhardware.net', 'www.cyberiansoftware.com'
> "Windows? No thanks, I have work to do..."
> Lvlug mailing list