tir, 11.01.2005 kl. 23.29 skrev cs@xxxxxxxxxx: > On 12:04 08 Jan 2005, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > | On Sat, 2005-01-08 at 15:27 +1100, Cameron Simpson wrote: > | > in this way _no_ mail reader needs extending because each remote service is > | > apparently a local ordinary service. [...] > | > I find it extremely convenient. > | > | It's a cute hack, but it doesn't seem to be as convenient as the way > | that Evolution, pine and mutt do it for me transparently. Especially as > | the mail servers I use tend not to have an IMAP d??mon listening at all, > | and as it still doesn't perform the authentication for you in the way > | that using SSH directly does -- your IMAP client would still need to > | store a password. > > Sure, or get me to type it, but on the other hand the place I most do > IMAP to doesn't give file-level access to the mail spool files. So I > can't "ssh in and run an IMAP _daemon_", so a real IMAP connection is > still required, so a password is _still_ required because ssh will only > get you as far as the shell server. > > I don't just do IMAP this way. I do pop this way too, and point fetchmail > at "zip.local" for that, too. And IRC. And you can generally get at any > service this way. If you're routinely inside a firewall that doesn't > allow much out but does allow ssh, you're in business and your tools > don't need to know anything special. So all you need to establish a vpn'ish connection to somewhere is that the site is running an accessable sshd? What about stuffing this into neat etc? It could be super-easy to setup on the server-side, and with a few good point'n'click's you could have it super-easy to setup on the client as well...
