Menu
▾
▴
fetchmail-users
|
From: Grant E. <gra...@gm...> - 2014-04-03 23:29:47
|
The last time I tried to set up fetchmail, it seemed to support SSL-wrapped IMAP and POP3 but not SMTP. Is that still the case? Why support SSL-wrapped IMAP and POP but not SMTP? I would think the infrastructure required to support IMAP/POP over SSL would work just as well for supporting SMTP over SSL. In all cases you're just connecting to a server using SSL and then running the exact same protocol on top of the SSL connection -- right? -- Grant |
|
From: J. E. <j.e...@ec...> - 2014-04-04 01:43:18
|
Am 03.04.2014 23:29, schrieb Grant Edwards: > The last time I tried to set up fetchmail, it seemed to support > SSL-wrapped IMAP and POP3 but not SMTP. > > Is that still the case? > > Why support SSL-wrapped IMAP and POP but not SMTP? > > I would think the infrastructure required to support IMAP/POP over SSL > would work just as well for supporting SMTP over SSL. In all cases > you're just connecting to a server using SSL and then running the > exact same protocol on top of the SSL connection -- right? > Hi Grant, why didn't you try it at first? Cheers Juergen |
|
From: Matthias A. <mat...@gm...> - 2014-04-04 07:08:47
|
Am 03.04.2014 23:29, schrieb Grant Edwards: > > The last time I tried to set up fetchmail, it seemed to support > SSL-wrapped IMAP and POP3 but not SMTP. > > Is that still the case? > > Why support SSL-wrapped IMAP and POP but not SMTP? > > I would think the infrastructure required to support IMAP/POP over SSL > would work just as well for supporting SMTP over SSL. In all cases > you're just connecting to a server using SSL and then running the > exact same protocol on top of the SSL connection -- right? This would require some more code, especially for STARTTLS support, that have not been written yet. But you're right, the infrastructure is there. The code has not yet been written because the assumption was that fetchmail would predominantly be used on the same computer as your SMTP server software, through "localhost" (which is the default), and it has been consequently assumed that that connection is trusted. |
|
From: Grant E. <gra...@gm...> - 2014-04-04 18:46:41
|
On 2014-04-03, J. Echter <j.e...@ec...> wrote: > Am 03.04.2014 23:29, schrieb Grant Edwards: >> The last time I tried to set up fetchmail, it seemed to support >> SSL-wrapped IMAP and POP3 but not SMTP. >> >> Is that still the case? >> >> Why support SSL-wrapped IMAP and POP but not SMTP? >> >> I would think the infrastructure required to support IMAP/POP over SSL >> would work just as well for supporting SMTP over SSL. In all cases >> you're just connecting to a server using SSL and then running the >> exact same protocol on top of the SSL connection -- right? >> > Hi Grant, > > why didn't you try it at first? I did try it. I couldn't figure out the correct options and after some googling discovered it wasn't supported (I found a number of other people trying to do the same thing). Now that there's an upcoming major release, I thought perhaps that issue had been addressed. -- Grant |
|
From: Grant E. <gra...@gm...> - 2014-04-04 18:53:13
|
On 2014-04-04, Matthias Andree <mat...@gm...> wrote: > Am 03.04.2014 23:29, schrieb Grant Edwards: >> >> The last time I tried to set up fetchmail, it seemed to support >> SSL-wrapped IMAP and POP3 but not SMTP. >> >> Is that still the case? >> >> Why support SSL-wrapped IMAP and POP but not SMTP? >> >> I would think the infrastructure required to support IMAP/POP over >> SSL would work just as well for supporting SMTP over SSL. In all >> cases you're just connecting to a server using SSL and then running >> the exact same protocol on top of the SSL connection -- right? > > This would require some more code, especially for STARTTLS support, > that have not been written yet. But you're right, the infrastructure > is there. In my googling, I didn't find anybody who wanted STARTTLS support, just standard pop3s. If one were to submit a patch adding support for pop3s, would it be accepted? [I've learned the hard way to ask before starting work on new features for open-source projects.] > The code has not yet been written because the assumption was that > fetchmail would predominantly be used on the same computer as your > SMTP server software, through "localhost" (which is the default), and > it has been consequently assumed that that connection is trusted. I'm currently using stunnel as a work-around, but it's rather tedious having to set up a second service and make sure the two services start up in the correct order. -- Grant |
|
From: Matthias A. <mat...@gm...> - 2014-04-09 09:50:34
|
Am 04.04.2014 18:53, schrieb Grant Edwards: > In my googling, I didn't find anybody who wanted STARTTLS support, > just standard pop3s. If one were to submit a patch adding support for > pop3s, would it be accepted? [I've learned the hard way to ask before > starting work on new features for open-source projects.] Grant, For POP3, StartTLS (STLS) is already in place, albeit with an awkward unintuitive configuration, because fetchmail 6.x lumps SSL protocol selection together with wrapped vs. STARTTLS mode. If you were to provide a clean patch for wrapped SSL or STARTTLS for (E)SMTP, against the Git master branch, I would definitely look at it. We would need to discuss how to select modes and protocols, though. I would rather not add to the proliferation of command line/rcfile options if it can be helped. I will not add features to the legacy_63 branch. Cheers, Matthias |
|
From: Grant E. <gra...@gm...> - 2014-04-09 17:36:57
|
On 2014-04-09, Matthias Andree <mat...@gm...> wrote: > Am 04.04.2014 18:53, schrieb Grant Edwards: > >> In my googling, I didn't find anybody who wanted STARTTLS support, >> just standard pop3s. If one were to submit a patch adding support >> for pop3s, would it be accepted? [I've learned the hard way to ask >> before starting work on new features for open-source projects.] > > Grant, > > For POP3, StartTLS (STLS) is already in place, albeit with an awkward > unintuitive configuration, because fetchmail 6.x lumps SSL protocol > selection together with wrapped vs. STARTTLS mode. Sorry, I started out talking about SMTP and switched to POP3 without explanation. I found people asking about POP3 (which as you point out is already handled) and wrapped SMTP but not STARTTLS. I somehow managed to mangle my posting and started typing pop instead of smtp. > If you were to provide a clean patch for wrapped SSL or STARTTLS for > (E)SMTP, against the Git master branch, I would definitely look at > it. Thanks, I would be interested in working on that. > We would need to discuss how to select modes and protocols, though. I have no opinion or preference, so if you would like to suggest something, that would be great. > I would rather not add to the proliferation of command line/rcfile > options if it can be helped. :) I've always found fetchmail's configuration syntax confusing, and every time I set up fetchmail I do it mostly by trail-and-error. At first I thought it was just me, then when ESR decided he needed to write a GUI config file editor I realized it wasn't just me... > I will not add features to the legacy_63 branch. No problem. -- Grant |
|
From: Grant E. <gra...@gm...> - 2014-04-09 22:48:33
|
On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 10:36:52AM -0500, Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2014-04-09, Matthias Andree <mat...@gm...> wrote: > > If you were to provide a clean patch for wrapped SSL or STARTTLS for > > (E)SMTP, against the Git master branch, I would definitely look at > > it. > > Thanks, I would be interested in working on that. Never mind. I wrote my own IMAP/ssl -> SMTP/ssl fetch-and-forward program. It doesn't have all the options and features that fetchmail does, but it does everything I need it to do. If, for some reason, it doesn't work out and I decide I need fetchmail again, I'll be back... ;) -- Grant |
|
From: Grant E. <gra...@gm...> - 2014-04-10 03:16:25
|
On 2014-04-09, grarpamp <gra...@gm...> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Grant Edwards <gra...@gm...> wrote: > >> I wrote my own IMAP/ssl -> SMTP/ssl fetch-and-forward program. >> >> It doesn't have all the options and features that fetchmail does, but >> it does everything I need it to do. If, for some reason, it doesn't >> work out and I decide I need fetchmail again, I'll be back... ;) > > I think what is being desired could also be done by dumping messages > into msmtp. Yup, msmtp works great -- and I already had it installed and configured, since that's what I use with mutt. I don't know why I didn't think of using it instead of fixating on SSL support for SMTP. I think I'll retire my home-made program (I hadn't fully "daemonized" it yet). Of course it took 10-15 tries to figure out the config file syntax. :) fetchmail kept complaining about "no mail servers have been specified", but I think in the end the main problem was I was running it as root. Thanks for the suggestions. -- Grant |
|
From: grarpamp <gra...@gm...> - 2014-04-10 00:04:27
|
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Grant Edwards <gra...@gm...> wrote: > I wrote my own IMAP/ssl -> SMTP/ssl fetch-and-forward program. > > It doesn't have all the options and features that fetchmail does, but > it does everything I need it to do. If, for some reason, it doesn't > work out and I decide I need fetchmail again, I'll be back... ;) I think what is being desired could also be done by dumping messages into msmtp. Of esmtp vs msmtp, msmtp has the best TLS support, IPv6, etc. Similar to fdm/getmail vs fetchmail in both those regards. Thought there was a third comparable smtp tool like msmtp out there but I have forgot it. |
|
From: Peter P. <ro...@ri...> - 2014-04-10 00:19:40
Attachments:
signature.asc
|
On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 06:04:25PM -0400, grarpamp wrote: > On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Grant Edwards <gra...@gm...> wrote: > > I wrote my own IMAP/ssl -> SMTP/ssl fetch-and-forward program. > > > > It doesn't have all the options and features that fetchmail does, but > > it does everything I need it to do. If, for some reason, it doesn't > > work out and I decide I need fetchmail again, I'll be back... ;) > > I think what is being desired could also be done by dumping > messages into msmtp. > Of esmtp vs msmtp, msmtp has the best TLS support, IPv6, etc. > Similar to fdm/getmail vs fetchmail in both those regards. > Thought there was a third comparable smtp tool like msmtp out > there but I have forgot it. Well, in theory there is nullmailer, but in practice there's dma (the DragonFly Mail Agent). G'luck, Peter -- Peter Pentchev ro...@ri... ro...@Fr... p.p...@st... PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint 2EE7 A7A5 17FC 124C F115 C354 651E EFB0 2527 DF13 Hey, out there - is it *you* reading me, or is it someone else? |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X