[51463] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Paul's Mailfrom (Was: IETF SMTP Working Group Proposal at
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jim Hickstein)
Tue Aug 27 22:34:25 2002
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 19:32:56 -0700
From: Jim Hickstein <jxh@jxh.com>
To: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
Cc: Jeroen Massar <jeroen@unfix.org>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20020826222859.A80168-100000@sequoia.muada.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--On Monday, August 26, 2002 10:34 PM +0200 Iljitsch van Beijnum
<iljitsch@muada.com> wrote:
> As a user, I pay my ISP to forward IP packets. If there happen to be TCP
> segments in those packets, that's something between me and the person the
> packet is addressed to, whether the destination port of those TCP segments
> is 25 or something else.
Hear, hear! I run an email-only service provider (www.imap-partners.net),
and we have to help certain users over the threshold at e.g. Earthlink by
permitting them to reach us on another port. This is logically ridiculous,
and bound to change.
Earthlink's behavior here may have some positive social benefit, but there
is a downside. If it becomes impossible for my customers to reach me and
do SMTP AUTH, I will be out of business. The network is not the
application, and should not be.
