hello
Jeroen van Aart wrote:
>
> One may argue why bother with 587 at all if you are still allowed to use 25.
>
Just because most ISPs will block port 25 unless you are using their own
mail relays. So if you want to use authenticated smtp, you have no real
choice besides using another port than 25.
> What is wisdom in this mess? Insist on everyone using port 587? ignore
> 587 and support a host of legacy clients with port 465 and allow port 25
> for submissions? Open all 3 ports and allow whatever people want on any
> port? Users have been told for years to use 25 (and 465), to add to the
> confusion.
>
You should probably support both port 465 (for broken clients) and port
587 (for all others). Along with port 25 for MTA-MTA communications.
> Out of curiosity, why is it so wrong to use 465? It's just a port
> number, not a religion. :-) Instead of choosing another port, those who
> "decide" (who?) could have renamed port 465 to read "submission". Or not?
>
Port 465 is assigned by IANA to something not related to smtp.
from http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers:
urd 465/tcp URL Rendesvous Directory for SSM
