[130106] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Randy in Nevis
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Peach)
Tue Sep 28 14:05:26 2010
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 14:05:11 -0400
From: John Peach <john-nanog@johnpeach.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <8C26A4FDAE599041A13EB499117D3C28405FA863@ex-mb-2.corp.atlasnetworks.us>
Reply-To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 17:39:33 +0000
Nathan Eisenberg <nathan@atlasnetworks.us> wrote:
> > >> 465 is not an odd-ball port, it's the standard well-known port
> > >> for STMPS.
> > >
> > > It is? That's not what's recorded at:
> > http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers
> > >
> > > urd 465/tcp URL Rendesvous Directory for SSM
> > > igmpv3lite 465/udp IGMP over UDP for SSM
> > >
> >
> > Microsoft frequently has different ideas about things.
> >
> > ~Seth
>
> FWIW - 465 is widely deployed as SMTPS, in more than just MS
> products. I'm actually quite surprised it's not in the well known
> ports list.
>
It is on all Linux distros:
ssmtp 465/tcp smtps # SMTP over SSL
--
John
