ingress SMTP

[jra at baylink.com (Jay R. Ashworth)]

On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 09:40:20AM -0700, Michael Thomas wrote:
> >"Allowing unfiltered public access to port 25 is one of the things that
> >increases everyone's spam load, and your ISP is trying to be a Good
> >Neighbor in blocking access to anyone's servers but their own; many ISPs
> >are moving towards this safer configuration. We're a good neighbor, as
> >well, and support Mail Submission Protocol on port 587, and here's how
> >you set it up -- and it will work from pretty much anywhere forever."
>
> I think this all vastly underrates the agility of the bad guys. So lots of
> ISP's have blocked port 25. Has it made any appreciable difference?
> Not that I can tell. If you block port 25, they'll just use another port and
> a relay if necessary.

You're forgetting that 587 *is authenticated, always*.

The issue here, though, was that of an Enhanced Mail Provider's clients
being unable to get through blocks *set by their client's ISPs*.

The EMP has no control over that except to switch said clients to MSP
(which they really should have done to begin with, as someone else
notes).

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                   Baylink                      jra at baylink.com
Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates     http://baylink.pitas.com                     '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://photo.imageinc.us             +1 727 647 1274

	     Those who cast the vote decide nothing.
	     Those who count the vote decide everything.
	       -- (Josef Stalin)