Email Error .. my ip public blocked



  • @Carnival-Boy said:

    OK, let me re-phrase, are you saying that anyone who has decent knowledge of e-mail systems but is running on-premise is an idiot?

    Of course not, but the likelihood of people who know email well running on premises becomes lower while the chances of people who don't understand it well or who can't convey this information well to management well having on premises is higher. The numbers shift. As it is generally valuable to be hosted it just makes sense that those who know email best will push in that direction more often than not and those that have clout or can convey these reasons to management will generally be more successful in that endeavor. There are good cases for being on premises with email (or mailboxes far more often) but they are declining over time and are relatively rare, probably below 10% (total guesstimate) of the sub-enterprise market and probably around 50% (or lower) of the enterprise market.



  • For those of us who have built email system from components (I can't recommend against this enough for use, but for learning about email, it is pretty useful) you actually have to assemble the email handling MTA (Sendmail, Postfix, Qmail, etc.) and the mailbox handler (Cyrus) and a web interface (assuming you want one, like IMP) and other items like SPAM and AV filtering. When you build email systems like this it is very interesting to see how they work together. Exchange and Zimbra are the same, just these components are all managed for you and you "never" see them separately or put them together manually and see how they are talking from one to another (technically sometimes when you get big you will pull Exchange apart and do this or pull Zimbra apart and do this.)

    The SMTP email portion can be kept on a different server than the mailboxes, for example. You can send and receive email with nothing but Postfix (what I prefer to use.) This is the email system. Once Postfix has done its job it is able to hand off files to something like Cyrus which is a file server that can share out files that it manages (Cyrus works with files, not with SMTP) via protocols like POP3 and IMAP4 which we often loosely call email protocols but are actually mailbox (fileserver) protocols. You can expose this even more by attaching directly to the system at the CLI and accessing the files stored there with no network at all and see that nothing like SMTP is in play. Or you can view them, using something like IMP, over HTTP, another fileserver (web) protocol.

    This combination of uses helps to explain where the network email (SMTP) portions are delineated in the system and where fileserver (mailbox) portions live and why I view having SMTP handling hosted as having the email hosted in a way because the sending and receiving of email (the post office portion, if you will) is hosted and only storage of the then received email (the sorting box on your desk in your office, if you will) might remain on premises.



  • wow, I'd love to see how this stands up in court... someone requests all email communication and you only supply things that traversed SMTP, and claim the rest aren't email... we'd see a new law come in pretty fast.



  • @Dashrender said:

    wow, I'd love to see how this stands up in court... someone requests all email communication and you only supply things that traversed SMTP, and claim the rest aren't email... we'd see a new law come in pretty fast.

    I don't believe that they normally request email, that's just how the media reports things - modified for non-technical people. Legally if they request email it would have to fall to one of the two definitions, one meaning all communications including text, instant messenger or whatever or the other being SMTP. And since no one actually treats it as the former, it's pretty darn safe to assume that it is the later. Which is why legal hold systems often exclusively grab the SMTP traffic for legal holds, because only that is email.



  • Remember that "requesting email" is a completely illogical thing to do in a court if the goal was to see what had been said. Why would any court say "Show us all of the email communications that went through Exchange but don't show us the Lync messages, documents stored in other systems, contents of attachments, etc."

    Of course they don't do that. That would be incredibly silly. They request categories like "all external communications", "all internal" or whatever it is they are looking for.