North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
RE: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587?
[email protected] wrote: > On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 16:51:50 EST, [email protected] said: > >> There seem to be many who feel there is no overwhelming reason to >> support 587. I can certainly see that point of view, but I guess my >> question is what reasons do those of you with that viewpoint have >> *not* to implement it? I just don't see the harm in either >> configuring your MTA to listen on an extra port, or just forward port >> 587 to 25 at the network level. Other than a few man-hours for >> implementation what are the added costs/risks that make you > so reluctant? What am I missing? > > You *don't* want to just forward 587 to 25. You want to to > use SMTP AUTH or similar on 587 to make sure only *your* > users connect to it as a mail injection service (unless, of > course, you *want* to be a spam relay ;) I guess my assumption was that SMTP AUTH was already configured on port 25. :-) That's how we're doing it -- I've opened up port 587 more as a move to help roaming users get around port 25 blocks imposed by various ISP's around the country than anything else. For us it was a fairly trivial change to make, which is why I was inquiring as to the apparent strenuous reluctance on the part of some to do the same. Andrew