Page 1 of 1
stunnel or tcpwrapper on a Lanier MFC? SSL connections from a Lanier
#1
Posted 30 July 2010 - 08:08 AM
Has anyone used stunnel for delivery of emails from a Lanier?
I noticed a Ricoh Tech here, maybe he has some input?
I noticed a Ricoh Tech here, maybe he has some input?
#2
Posted 30 July 2010 - 06:52 PM
looking at their .org site this can be a client based or server based.
Can you explain a little more on what you are wanting to do. They will do imap, smtp and pop as well as others but I a do not think you can embed a client into one of the devices but the instructions mentioned that you can install it on a client PC and then transfer the data to the device?
( It will also depend on the model and or generation of firmware the machine may have )
Can you explain a little more on what you are wanting to do. They will do imap, smtp and pop as well as others but I a do not think you can embed a client into one of the devices but the instructions mentioned that you can install it on a client PC and then transfer the data to the device?
( It will also depend on the model and or generation of firmware the machine may have )
#3
Posted 30 July 2010 - 08:45 PM
your_techguy, on 30 July 2010 - 10:08 AM, said:
Has anyone used stunnel for delivery of emails from a Lanier?
I noticed a Ricoh Tech here, maybe he has some input?
I noticed a Ricoh Tech here, maybe he has some input?
I'm assuming that you need to scan to email from a Lanier in an environment where SSL is required. (Gmail and quite a few others are known for this), and the MFP won't support it. Am I correct?
If so, Stunnel would certainly work (and no, you can't install any client piece on the MFP), it requires some other definite support SSL "stuff", and is not for the timid or beginners.
What I usually do (I set up Ricohs every day) if there won't be tons of scanning, is get the customer to set up a free account at GMX.com, and use that account for scanning.
It uses port 25, with no SSL required.
It has been my faithful friend for quite a while now, and almost always works.
About the only time it doesn't is when the customer's network (or ISP) won't allow outbound connections using port 25; quite rare, but it happens.
M.C.S.E. - Minesweeper Consultant & Solitaire Expert
#4
Posted 30 July 2010 - 08:58 PM
Skrat, on 30 July 2010 - 09:45 PM, said:
About the only time it doesn't is when the customer's network (or ISP) won't allow outbound connections using port 25; quite rare, but it happens.
Let me look on my laptop at work but I think we use 485. It works great and is an alternative to port 25. I use it at work because verison blocks port 25. My home system also routes post 25 to another port but I have that set up with my hosting company to rerout it as copiertalk server and "suddenlink) have issues.
If I see the thread I will look what port we use in the morning.
It is simular to this but I do not think we use the same port.
http://mail.google.c...en&answer=13287
#6
Posted 30 July 2010 - 09:06 PM
Port 587.
Try that. That is what we use. Get back to us with how it works.
Try that. That is what we use. Get back to us with how it works.
#7
Posted 30 July 2010 - 09:25 PM
lostintexas, on 30 July 2010 - 11:06 PM, said:
Port 587.
Try that. That is what we use. Get back to us with how it works.
Try that. That is what we use. Get back to us with how it works.
What I have found is that the Ricoh family of machines (Ricoh, Lanier, Gestetner, and Savin) can use any port number (normally 25, 465, or 587), but they don't support SSL.
That has been a sore subject for some time now, but I keep hearing that it will be corrected "soon".
All that, of course, is if I am reading the original post correctly, where SSL is required.
I also have a number of customers with Verizon, and we set the port for 587, but no SSL is needed.
M.C.S.E. - Minesweeper Consultant & Solitaire Expert
#8
Posted 30 July 2010 - 09:37 PM
I agree.
SSL on early machines was almost non existant and is still lacking in some area.
you are probably right on the 465,
SSL on most " modern " devices should work depending on his needs ( we are jumpig the wire on what he has ).
skrat is right, it should work with those port numbers.
SSL on early machines was almost non existant and is still lacking in some area.
you are probably right on the 465,
SSL on most " modern " devices should work depending on his needs ( we are jumpig the wire on what he has ).
skrat is right, it should work with those port numbers.
Share this topic:
Page 1 of 1

Help















