On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:01:20 -0800, Jeroen van Aart
<kroshka@???> wrote:
>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.
>
>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?
Please do not confuse two things: On tcp/587, you are expected to
speak cleartext ESMTP first and can _optionally_ use STARTTLS to
convet an already built connection to encryption ("SMTP over TLS over
SMTP").
On tcp/465, it is expected to establish an encrypted connection first
and then speak ESMTP ("SMTP over TLS").
Two completely different and mutually incompatible things.
Greetings
Marc
--
-------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -----
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834
