Outgoing SMTP Servers
bill at herrin.us
Wed Oct 26 04:33:37 UTC 2011
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 8:15 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> On Oct 25, 2011, at 3:16 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>> If you're doing the "right" thing, sending email via encrypted,
>> authenticated mechanisms, then you're doing it TCP ports 587 or 443.
>> Where Mike's mechanism obstructs you not at all.
> Depends. Some hotel admins aren't so bright. That's the problem. Not
> everyone hears block outbound SMTP on port 25, they hear block outbound
> SMTP and stop listening. Boom, 25, 465, 587 all get turned off.
Sure. But that's not Mike's mechanism. It's ignorant hotel guy's
mechanism. Don't penalize Mike because some other fool does something
similar but wrong.
>> If you're still doing the wrong thing, trying to talk to remote SMTP
>> servers on TCP port 25, why should his mechanisms not punish you?
> It's not wrong to talk to them on port 25. It's wrong to allow unauthenticated
> remote users to send on your own port 25 for relay purposes.
Sure it is. Same way it's wrong to have an open relay or an unsecured
proxy. It isn't 1995 any more.
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
More information about the NANOG