[78099] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (J.D. Falk)
Sat Feb 19 11:27:50 2005
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 08:27:17 -0800
From: "J.D. Falk" <jdfalk@cybernothing.org>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <871xbcellp.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On 02/19/05, Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> wrote:
> * Sean Donelan:
>
> > Yet another reason for supporting port 587 on your servers for remote
> > authenticated mail submission from your users. If you don't support
> > port 587, and use SPF, it may break when AOL or other providers re-direct
> > port 25.
> >
> > http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/56437
>
> Has AOL notified anyone in advance? Quite a few provider-independent
> mail providers were caught by surprise.
Is there a mailing list that will reach all/most of these
provider-independent mail providers?
(If so, then that's where we should be having this discussion
asking why they don't support port 587 yet.)
--
J.D. Falk uncertainty is only a virtue
<jdfalk@cybernothing.org> when you don't know the answer yet
