On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Kendrick Vargas wrote: > It wouldn't surprise me if some "in the know" net admins would block this > too simply cuz it's in an RFC. Therefore, I still like my port better :-) > Besides, something like 2525 will be easier to remember than 587.
Unlike port 25, port 587 isn't useful for spammers (MTAs are not widely configured to recieve mail from arbitrary external sources on port 587 -- only from either authenticated sources or atleast senders from that domain)... So there'd really be no need. -Rob -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Rob Siemborski * Andrew Systems Group * Cyert Hall 207 * 412-268-7456 Research Systems Programmer * /usr/contributed Gatekeeper --- Home Page: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyruswiki.andrew.cmu.edu List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
