OpenBSD to the rescue. I've heard CARP has been ported to FreeBSD a few months ago. Perhaps we'll see something like this in Linux sometime soon.
I've personally used LVS in a 2.6 kernel using keepalived (honestly probably the single most useful programs I've ever used, its exceptionally great software) to deploy a Mail cluster supporting SMTP/POP3 (and their SSL counterparts) in addition to Webmail over HTTP/HTTPS. It worked very well. I used dual Opteron 242's in MSI K1-1000 Chassis with a RaidZone RAID10 backend, it worked phenominally well.
SMTP, POP3, and HTTP are very forgiving protocols with respect to an LVS node going down, because people will simply either "re-check" their mail, click refresh or the software will wait long enough to be reconnected. Obviously any streaming software suffers, but this is why I mentioned CARP.
CARP: http://www.countersiege.com/doc/pfsync-carp/
OpenBSD to the rescue. I've heard CARP has been ported to FreeBSD a few months ago. Perhaps we'll see something like this in Linux sometime soon.
I've personally used LVS in a 2.6 kernel using keepalived (honestly probably the single most useful programs I've ever used, its exceptionally great software) to deploy a Mail cluster supporting SMTP/POP3 (and their SSL counterparts) in addition to Webmail over HTTP/HTTPS. It worked very well. I used dual Opteron 242's in MSI K1-1000 Chassis with a RaidZone RAID10 backend, it worked phenominally well.
SMTP, POP3, and HTTP are very forgiving protocols with respect to an LVS node going down, because people will simply either "re-check" their mail, click refresh or the software will wait long enough to be reconnected. Obviously any streaming software suffers, but this is why I mentioned CARP.
People are just griping because you're coming across as a Wesley Crusher type.
You have no idea how amusing that remark is, I actually became aware of how much I had to piss when laughing at that and had to go off and relieve myself.
The educational papers would do you well. You'd absorb the material quickly because you're interested in it. It would also broaden your knowledge and save you from re-inventing the wheel when you're working on projects.
I quite agree with you, but its just never been an option. Picking things up is way too easy, I've been married for the last 5 years and I'm making decent enough money, and decently enough in debt that I just can't do it. I missed that boat along time ago. Instead however, I participate regularly in activities that involve those who were fortunate enough to go to school, and I regularly seek them out for input when trying to solve problems.
I've been very fortunate to have excellent mentors , and I had my head boxed in a couple of times young enough that "you've got two ears and only one mouth for a reason!" actually sunk in. I've been able to get by, and even be very successful in some areas because I can't help but ask people questions. Hopefully not as annoying as the 3 or 4 year old asking "why?" "but why?":-)
Have you ever seen code written by a 13 year old working by themselves? It looks awfully similar to code written by anyone who has no formal training or team work experience. The 13 year old is also always trying to prove how good they are at coding... it's a pain to deal with kids like that.
Yeah I have. I knew I wasn't a great programmer then, in fact, I was embarrassed to show anyone what I was working on. What I attempted to obtain employment in was the telecommunications industry with which I was so interested in. The local Telco was THE place I wanted to work, their loss however, their Internet architecture is fucking shoddy and like most Telco's they are clueless anyway. The only saving grace for them is their sheer size, being Canada's largest telecommunicative monopoly operated by union nazis seems to have worked out well for them.
You read far too deeply into everything. Go google on how large "google development teams" are.
As I stated in response to some others who misinterpreted the intended meaning behind my statement about a landscaper attempting to become a developer. It was a statement about how everyone and their dog were joining tech for the money, not about arrogantly vomitting all over someone who was trying to come up.
I have a wife of 5 years, I have a mortage of 3 years, I pay all my bills, and I eat food, and yet somehow I also find time to do those things I mentioned.
I would rather work hard now while I have then energy then work hard later in life when I don't.
If I had read this around that time, I would have refused to believe it. Experience has taught me otherwise.
I found your remarks quite interesting, execept that I found your thought that it was either because I was a teen that I didn't get the job, or if I was actually a teen and good enough, that I was just an arrogant prick or more touble than I was worth a little unfair. I repeatedly received responses along the lines of "we really like you, and are extremely impressed at your level of interest/competence/etc... BUT our company policies do not allow us to hrie someone without a degree. You should really enroll in Univ, someone with such a taste for knowledge would most certainly...."
Think about the MCSE, CCNA, or A+ certificates. ANYONE could pass them, even a fucking 10 year old. Hell I've met 13 year olds with more knowledge than 90% of the people I've met with any of those three degrees (excluding perhaps the CCNA which seems attract less asshats).
Its all setup improperly, and the flaws likely reside somewhere along the lines in elementary schooling where children's interests are neither noticed early enough nor are correctly nutured or capitalized on. I happened to get lucky, I'm anal retentive and persistent enough to never give up, and outgoing enough that I ran into enough people and spoke out about my interests that it eventually found me in the right industry.
Interesting argument. I don't agree with it, but I found it very interesting.
As I replied to another individual who seemingly took my reference to a former friend who changed from landscaping to software development out of context, the context was that everyone and their dog were jumping into IT, NOT that "manual labour" is for the ignorant and stupid.
You are right about working too much, but... its not really work, because when I go home I do the same thing because its so enjoyable. This is I suppose one of the dangers of working at something you not only enjoy doing, but you are good at. Maybe enjoying what you are doing bears some relevence to how good one is? Maybe Wayne Gretzky just loved hockey a little more than everyone else?
I agree very strongly with you on this one. What an amusing situation North America is...
I can't help but think that the interpretive languages have done nothing but not only permit and encourage outsourcing.
This is why Microsoft has so many problems... ITS CALLED CODE FOR A REASON. Making everything easier, so people have to think less... how is this a good thing? Oh right its not, its purely about greed and stuffing more money into their pockets.
This world is going to hell in a handbasket, never has underachievement been so rampant.
I think the best programmers are poor. Think about that...
In short, my reference to seeing an old friend who stated he was "getting into the industry" was to point out that everyone and their dog were "getting into IT" because of the money, leaving whatever job they were in previously.
I'm no where near as arrogant as that statement when misapplied or misinterpreted may make me appear.
Why is it, that people get so offended, without contemplating the possibility that the individual who wrote the statement is in possession of the "real life" experience that warranted such writing.
At 13 I started to run a BBS, by 14 I was pulling down FidoNet feeds for my local town, by 16 I had sold my BBS, computer, and modem for $300 -- I don't even remember what I did with the money.
Before I "was a programmer"... oh wait, I started programming when I was 13. But I stopped, because no one would hire me without a "certificate". The biggest fucking IDIOTS had jobs I could have done in my sleep. I had practical experience, and I have the knowledge. I didn't have a certificate, so I had no job!
The lesson I didn't learn was that you need to learn how to bullshit. The people that manage this industry (CEO, whatever) are complete fucking clowns, and so they rely on certificates (these are about as useful as digital certificates for webservers) to know if someone actually knows what they are talking about. This process is flawed in more ways than one... because the clowns can't recognize good talent even when it comes up in front of them and kicks them in the as, those individuals who have taught them selves (beware of these people, they are extremely dangerous! they think for themselves, and they, they know these things, these things that they know they just come up with without having anyone even teach them!) as a result become disenchanted or left out in the cold.
No, actually that former friend of mine recently married my wife's cousin, and at the wedding I asked him what he was doing these days. You know, I was actually two inebriated to remember, but it wasn't "software developer".
And for the record, I've been:
Carpet Cleaner
Stock Facer for a supermarket (someone has to turn all those French labels around!)
Landscaper
Roofer
Engineering Clerk (making copies!)
Carpet Technican (laying floors!)
Baker (making buns!)
Editor*
* this is the job that finally allowed me entrance into this industry as a sysadmin, and as everyone knows a little code goes a long way automating things as an administrator, and thus I resumed my foray into the world of software development...
I have a disease where I have difficulty using something where I don't know how it works. This has caused me to take many things apart, and even cost me some good money, why I've got 4 bricked WRT54G routers stacked up in front of me. and I'm versed enough with JTAG to unbrick them if they were unbrickable, which I do not believe them to be.
Many many people are not cursed with this wretched disease that consumes many hours of time and money, and provides countless hours of pleasure and knowledge. . .
Hrm, I don't think you are well suited to be performing interviews then.
I think you need to re-read my comment, and do not become so personally offended by its truthful nature!
I live for this industry because there is no end to what you can learn, and even if the learning slows down the myriad of differing ways you can apply your knowledge and skill are seemingly limitless.
Lets dwell on this a little..
Hire 20 "java programmers" to work on a project (surely out of 20, 2 have to be somewhat useful).
Hire 2 "real programmers" (shouldn't take much to think about this inference, hint: its not a direct dig at Java) pay them properly, perhaps even exorbidently.
I wish I actually had the funds to carry out the above "expiriment" because I'd like to believe the two "real programmers" would likely not only get it done as fast or faster, it would probably cost less, and likely be more efficient, have less bugs, be more robust, take up less space, . ..
Judge success based on relevent topics such as efficiency, time to completion, robustness, etc.. etc..
Its hard to apply a real world analogy to "underlying understanding" with respect to programmers who understand the underlying implications of writing things a certain way, such as one doesn't have to know anything about fixing a motor or the internals of a car in order to be a great race car driver. This is partly true of programming, although I don't think the analogy is a good one.
This 'coding is a destiny' and cant be learned crap is just a self comforting excuse for saddos who dont have the requisite skillset to actually get a job or compete in the job market.
I found that to be particularly disturbing. Since I never said anything even close to warranting that response. For the record 'x is a destiny' is crap. However, there are those who just do it better with less effort. Where is the next Wayne Gretzky?
I really can't fathom why anyone would ever want a job that doesn't inspire them to continually better themselves, broaden their skillset/knowledge or learn at their own expense/time because doing so enthralls them.
Something you said really struck me as insiteful although in hindsight its a pretty obvious statement, at any rate, it was "It became clear that you didn't have to be very good to shine".
At first thought I'm inclined to smile and think that it not taking much to shine equates to less stress, but then that smile quickly degrades to frown as the depressing reality:
1. It gets boring doing the same simple tricks over for master.
2. The desire to achieve diminishes because master can't appreciate the depth or relevence of accomplishment
Meh.
It makes one ponder just what the full scale adoption of interpretive languages has done. Yeah yeah Java compiles sure sure... its just like XML, its about as extensible or cross platform as Eddie Murphy is to an albino.
Looking at post-secondary curriculum I see nothing but Java being taught, and I think this is a pretty big mistake. Who cares if its easy, if you don't undersstand the fundamentals of how computer hardware and operating systems interact, you don't stand a chance at either staying interested or actually writing anything not crappy.
The biggest problem is that the IT industry was flooded with fucking asshats interested in it only for the money. I recall quite clearly a former friend who was a landscaper. I didn't see him for a couple of years and then ran into him downtown where he told me he was learning C++ and Java, at which point I suddenly felt the urge to vommit.
"Perhaps an organization could be formed with the sole purpose of writing docs for OSS projects."
PREACH THE GOSEPL BROTHER
On my project @ libspf.org, I've spent several orders of magnitude more time monkeying around with documentation, and autocrap, far more so than I ever have actually writing code. Its disgusting.
An organization that could perform the above service for OSS projects would be a fucking godsend although its probably quite unrealistic.
I'm from the SPF project. There is a forwarding problem. SRS was developed. I wrote a library for it. SRS failed (ugly, but working solution, not very popular). So I got together with some friends and developed SES (http://ses.codeshare.ca) which operates fully independantly of SPF or any other technology, does NOT publish information in DNS (but can make use of an SPF modifier to facilitate such) and provides better protection than DK and IIM combined. We will be releasing an RFC Draft through the IETF-CLEAR working group headed up by Dave Crocker who is pushing BATV which is literally what SES was 6 months ago amusingly enough.
DK might be open, but its the wrong way to go, it puts the burden upon the recipient. This is a DoS attack waiting to happen. I hope to prove this via a "controlled experiment;-)" just to make a point.
The more choices there are, the better, and it means that there is a healthy amount of attention being placed on this important issue. Unfortunately the greedy want to rush... SES is already deployed by two members of the development team and I finished the C implementation with qmail and sendmail patches today and I hope to release soon. Give it a look if this floats your boat.
Sender-ID is not Microsoft's.
Sender-ID is SPF with a patent encumbered (and useless) technology known as PRA.
Here is my speculation. Microsoft has been trying to (and successfully has it appears) the SPF vehicle to use for their own purposes, which is to compete with Yahoo's Domain Keys. Props to Yahoo for at least a decent and aptly named technology. Microsoft's competetive *cough* copy cat *cough* technology is called "Email Postmarks". The continued association of electronic mail with real mail is disturbing -- as is Microsoft's use of "CallerID for E-mail". Man they really know how to label those projects so absolute fucking morons can understand... oh wait, thats right, thats most MS lusers...
MS wants to shove this postmarks crap down your throat and Verislime wants to sell you certificates for this. The idea being that in order for mail from your server to be respected you'll need to buy a certificate. If you have one, then people won't reject your e-mail. What a novel idea! They are trying to do to SMTP what Verislime did to HTTPS.
Slashdot Mirror
CARP: http://www.countersiege.com/doc/pfsync-carp/
OpenBSD to the rescue. I've heard CARP has been ported to FreeBSD a few months ago. Perhaps we'll see something like this in Linux sometime soon.
I've personally used LVS in a 2.6 kernel using keepalived (honestly probably the single most useful programs I've ever used, its exceptionally great software) to deploy a Mail cluster supporting SMTP/POP3 (and their SSL counterparts) in addition to Webmail over HTTP/HTTPS. It worked very well. I used dual Opteron 242's in MSI K1-1000 Chassis with a RaidZone RAID10 backend, it worked phenominally well.
SMTP, POP3, and HTTP are very forgiving protocols with respect to an LVS node going down, because people will simply either "re-check" their mail, click refresh or the software will wait long enough to be reconnected. Obviously any streaming software suffers, but this is why I mentioned CARP.
CARP: http://www.countersiege.com/doc/pfsync-carp/ OpenBSD to the rescue. I've heard CARP has been ported to FreeBSD a few months ago. Perhaps we'll see something like this in Linux sometime soon. I've personally used LVS in a 2.6 kernel using keepalived (honestly probably the single most useful programs I've ever used, its exceptionally great software) to deploy a Mail cluster supporting SMTP/POP3 (and their SSL counterparts) in addition to Webmail over HTTP/HTTPS. It worked very well. I used dual Opteron 242's in MSI K1-1000 Chassis with a RaidZone RAID10 backend, it worked phenominally well. SMTP, POP3, and HTTP are very forgiving protocols with respect to an LVS node going down, because people will simply either "re-check" their mail, click refresh or the software will wait long enough to be reconnected. Obviously any streaming software suffers, but this is why I mentioned CARP.
I quite agree with you, but its just never been an option. Picking things up is way too easy, I've been married for the last 5 years and I'm making decent enough money, and decently enough in debt that I just can't do it. I missed that boat along time ago. Instead however, I participate regularly in activities that involve those who were fortunate enough to go to school, and I regularly seek them out for input when trying to solve problems.
I've been very fortunate to have excellent mentors , and I had my head boxed in a couple of times young enough that "you've got two ears and only one mouth for a reason!" actually sunk in. I've been able to get by, and even be very successful in some areas because I can't help but ask people questions. Hopefully not as annoying as the 3 or 4 year old asking "why?" "but why?"
Yeah I have. I knew I wasn't a great programmer then, in fact, I was embarrassed to show anyone what I was working on. What I attempted to obtain employment in was the telecommunications industry with which I was so interested in. The local Telco was THE place I wanted to work, their loss however, their Internet architecture is fucking shoddy and like most Telco's they are clueless anyway. The only saving grace for them is their sheer size, being Canada's largest telecommunicative monopoly operated by union nazis seems to have worked out well for them.
You read far too deeply into everything. Go google on how large "google development teams" are. As I stated in response to some others who misinterpreted the intended meaning behind my statement about a landscaper attempting to become a developer. It was a statement about how everyone and their dog were joining tech for the money, not about arrogantly vomitting all over someone who was trying to come up. I have a wife of 5 years, I have a mortage of 3 years, I pay all my bills, and I eat food, and yet somehow I also find time to do those things I mentioned. I would rather work hard now while I have then energy then work hard later in life when I don't.
If I had read this around that time, I would have refused to believe it. Experience has taught me otherwise.
I found your remarks quite interesting, execept that I found your thought that it was either because I was a teen that I didn't get the job, or if I was actually a teen and good enough, that I was just an arrogant prick or more touble than I was worth a little unfair. I repeatedly received responses along the lines of "we really like you, and are extremely impressed at your level of interest/competence/etc... BUT our company policies do not allow us to hrie someone without a degree. You should really enroll in Univ, someone with such a taste for knowledge would most certainly...."
Think about the MCSE, CCNA, or A+ certificates. ANYONE could pass them, even a fucking 10 year old. Hell I've met 13 year olds with more knowledge than 90% of the people I've met with any of those three degrees (excluding perhaps the CCNA which seems attract less asshats).
Its all setup improperly, and the flaws likely reside somewhere along the lines in elementary schooling where children's interests are neither noticed early enough nor are correctly nutured or capitalized on. I happened to get lucky, I'm anal retentive and persistent enough to never give up, and outgoing enough that I ran into enough people and spoke out about my interests that it eventually found me in the right industry.
AMEN BROTHER!!
Interesting argument. I don't agree with it, but I found it very interesting.
... its not really work, because when I go home I do the same thing because its so enjoyable. This is I suppose one of the dangers of working at something you not only enjoy doing, but you are good at. Maybe enjoying what you are doing bears some relevence to how good one is? Maybe Wayne Gretzky just loved hockey a little more than everyone else?
As I replied to another individual who seemingly took my reference to a former friend who changed from landscaping to software development out of context, the context was that everyone and their dog were jumping into IT, NOT that "manual labour" is for the ignorant and stupid.
You are right about working too much, but
I agree very strongly with you on this one. What an amusing situation North America is...
I can't help but think that the interpretive languages have done nothing but not only permit and encourage outsourcing.
This is why Microsoft has so many problems... ITS CALLED CODE FOR A REASON. Making everything easier, so people have to think less... how is this a good thing? Oh right its not, its purely about greed and stuffing more money into their pockets.
This world is going to hell in a handbasket, never has underachievement been so rampant.
I think the best programmers are poor. Think about that...
In short, my reference to seeing an old friend who stated he was "getting into the industry" was to point out that everyone and their dog were "getting into IT" because of the money, leaving whatever job they were in previously.
I'm no where near as arrogant as that statement when misapplied or misinterpreted may make me appear.
That being said, I enjoyed reading your response.
At 13 I started to run a BBS, by 14 I was pulling down FidoNet feeds for my local town, by 16 I had sold my BBS, computer, and modem for $300 -- I don't even remember what I did with the money.
Before I "was a programmer"
The lesson I didn't learn was that you need to learn how to bullshit. The people that manage this industry (CEO, whatever) are complete fucking clowns, and so they rely on certificates (these are about as useful as digital certificates for webservers) to know if someone actually knows what they are talking about. This process is flawed in more ways than one... because the clowns can't recognize good talent even when it comes up in front of them and kicks them in the as, those individuals who have taught them selves (beware of these people, they are extremely dangerous! they think for themselves, and they, they know these things, these things that they know they just come up with without having anyone even teach them!) as a result become disenchanted or left out in the cold.
No, actually that former friend of mine recently married my wife's cousin, and at the wedding I asked him what he was doing these days. You know, I was actually two inebriated to remember, but it wasn't "software developer".
And for the record, I've been:
- Carpet Cleaner
- Stock Facer for a supermarket (someone has to turn all those French labels around!)
- Landscaper
- Roofer
- Engineering Clerk (making copies!)
- Carpet Technican (laying floors!)
- Baker (making buns!)
- Editor*
* this is the job that finally allowed me entrance into this industry as a sysadmin, and as everyone knows a little code goes a long way automating things as an administrator, and thus I resumed my foray into the world of software development...I have a disease where I have difficulty using something where I don't know how it works. This has caused me to take many things apart, and even cost me some good money, why I've got 4 bricked WRT54G routers stacked up in front of me. and I'm versed enough with JTAG to unbrick them if they were unbrickable, which I do not believe them to be.
Many many people are not cursed with this wretched disease that consumes many hours of time and money, and provides countless hours of pleasure and knowledge. . .
I think you need to re-read my comment, and do not become so personally offended by its truthful nature!
I live for this industry because there is no end to what you can learn, and even if the learning slows down the myriad of differing ways you can apply your knowledge and skill are seemingly limitless.
Lets dwell on this a little..
Hire 20 "java programmers" to work on a project (surely out of 20, 2 have to be somewhat useful).
Hire 2 "real programmers" (shouldn't take much to think about this inference, hint: its not a direct dig at Java) pay them properly, perhaps even exorbidently.
I wish I actually had the funds to carry out the above "expiriment" because I'd like to believe the two "real programmers" would likely not only get it done as fast or faster, it would probably cost less, and likely be more efficient, have less bugs, be more robust, take up less space, . .
Judge success based on relevent topics such as efficiency, time to completion, robustness, etc.. etc..
Its hard to apply a real world analogy to "underlying understanding" with respect to programmers who understand the underlying implications of writing things a certain way, such as one doesn't have to know anything about fixing a motor or the internals of a car in order to be a great race car driver. This is partly true of programming, although I don't think the analogy is a good one.
I found that to be particularly disturbing. Since I never said anything even close to warranting that response. For the record 'x is a destiny' is crap. However, there are those who just do it better with less effort. Where is the next Wayne Gretzky?
I really can't fathom why anyone would ever want a job that doesn't inspire them to continually better themselves, broaden their skillset/knowledge or learn at their own expense/time because doing so enthralls them.
Something you said really struck me as insiteful although in hindsight its a pretty obvious statement, at any rate, it was "It became clear that you didn't have to be very good to shine". At first thought I'm inclined to smile and think that it not taking much to shine equates to less stress, but then that smile quickly degrades to frown as the depressing reality: 1. It gets boring doing the same simple tricks over for master. 2. The desire to achieve diminishes because master can't appreciate the depth or relevence of accomplishment Meh.
It makes one ponder just what the full scale adoption of interpretive languages has done. Yeah yeah Java compiles sure sure... its just like XML, its about as extensible or cross platform as Eddie Murphy is to an albino.
Looking at post-secondary curriculum I see nothing but Java being taught, and I think this is a pretty big mistake. Who cares if its easy, if you don't undersstand the fundamentals of how computer hardware and operating systems interact, you don't stand a chance at either staying interested or actually writing anything not crappy.
The biggest problem is that the IT industry was flooded with fucking asshats interested in it only for the money. I recall quite clearly a former friend who was a landscaper. I didn't see him for a couple of years and then ran into him downtown where he told me he was learning C++ and Java, at which point I suddenly felt the urge to vommit.
"Perhaps an organization could be formed with the sole purpose of writing docs for OSS projects." PREACH THE GOSEPL BROTHER On my project @ libspf.org, I've spent several orders of magnitude more time monkeying around with documentation, and autocrap, far more so than I ever have actually writing code. Its disgusting. An organization that could perform the above service for OSS projects would be a fucking godsend although its probably quite unrealistic.
I found your comment to be extremely amusing and equally insightful.
I'm from the SPF project. There is a forwarding problem. SRS was developed. I wrote a library for it. SRS failed (ugly, but working solution, not very popular). So I got together with some friends and developed SES (http://ses.codeshare.ca) which operates fully independantly of SPF or any other technology, does NOT publish information in DNS (but can make use of an SPF modifier to facilitate such) and provides better protection than DK and IIM combined. We will be releasing an RFC Draft through the IETF-CLEAR working group headed up by Dave Crocker who is pushing BATV which is literally what SES was 6 months ago amusingly enough.
;-)" just to make a point.
DK might be open, but its the wrong way to go, it puts the burden upon the recipient. This is a DoS attack waiting to happen. I hope to prove this via a "controlled experiment
The more choices there are, the better, and it means that there is a healthy amount of attention being placed on this important issue. Unfortunately the greedy want to rush... SES is already deployed by two members of the development team and I finished the C implementation with qmail and sendmail patches today and I hope to release soon. Give it a look if this floats your boat.
Sender-ID is not Microsoft's. Sender-ID is SPF with a patent encumbered (and useless) technology known as PRA. Here is my speculation. Microsoft has been trying to (and successfully has it appears) the SPF vehicle to use for their own purposes, which is to compete with Yahoo's Domain Keys. Props to Yahoo for at least a decent and aptly named technology. Microsoft's competetive *cough* copy cat *cough* technology is called "Email Postmarks". The continued association of electronic mail with real mail is disturbing -- as is Microsoft's use of "CallerID for E-mail". Man they really know how to label those projects so absolute fucking morons can understand... oh wait, thats right, thats most MS lusers... MS wants to shove this postmarks crap down your throat and Verislime wants to sell you certificates for this. The idea being that in order for mail from your server to be respected you'll need to buy a certificate. If you have one, then people won't reject your e-mail. What a novel idea! They are trying to do to SMTP what Verislime did to HTTPS.