1994-11-28 - Re: How to disable telnet to port 25

Header Data

From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@imsi.com>
To: “Robert A. Hayden” <hayden@krypton.mankato.msus.edu>
Message Hash: 35ffedde15a0ac17cfda2969a54926ae667d663ae274a5e4cc1b1fe464d5c80b
Message ID: <9411281023.AA11423@snark.imsi.com>
Reply To: <Pine.3.89.9411272200.A19661-0100000@krypton.mankato.msus.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1994-11-28 10:23:43 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 28 Nov 94 02:23:43 PST

Raw message

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 94 02:23:43 PST
To: "Robert A. Hayden" <hayden@krypton.mankato.msus.edu>
Subject: Re: How to disable telnet to port 25
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9411272200.A19661-0100000@krypton.mankato.msus.edu>
Message-ID: <9411281023.AA11423@snark.imsi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



"Robert A. Hayden" says:
> I've been meaning to ask about for some time and I never really got 
> around to it; Are there any short-term plans to press for an RFC 
> utilizing digital signatures?

There is already an RFC on this (and indeed has been for some years);
its called "PEM", or Privacy Enhanced Mail. Thus far it's been a
complete flop. Its thought that certain modifications being proposed
right now (MIME integration, "mail style" names instead of X.500
distinguished names, and the ability to use non-hierarchical signature
certificates) may change that.

Perry





Thread