North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Port 587 vs. 25 [was: DNS Hijacking by Cox]

  • From: Jeroen Wunnink
  • Date: Mon Jul 23 06:19:01 2007

There's no issue for a hosting provider to open alternate mail ports, the issue is the flood of not too tech savvy customers who come at you with a "I haven't changed anything, it's your fault, now make my E-mail work again"

I've once suggested to one of the major ISP's here in the Netherlands to close down outgoing port 25 for transit links only and keep it on the local exchanges open (AMS-IX, NL-IX, etc), since there's usually a direct point of contact anyways to the people you directly peer with and thus having an easy abuse contact.

No success there though..

At 11:49 23-7-2007, you wrote:

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Jeroen Wunnink wrote:

It's a lot more trouble for hosting providers that provide customers with webhosting and E-mail services.

Why? What stops you from migrating them to TCP/587? I'd imagine direct TCP/25 access to your servers would be spotty at best, anyway. Where I'm at, there are more ISPs blocking TCP/25 to anything but their own email servers, that those who do not block.

Mikael Abrahamsson    email: [email protected]

Met vriendelijke groet,

Jeroen Wunnink,
EasyHosting B.V. Systeembeheerder
[email protected]

telefoon:+31 (035) 6285455              Postbus 48
fax: +31 (035) 6838242                  3755 ZG Eemnes