nanog mailing list archives
Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587?
From: Michael.Dillon () radianz com
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:31:52 +0000
Internal users: With AUTH - correlate message with authenticated
user,
then forbid mail transmission for them only. I'd rather do that than slog through RADIUS logs. But, hey, maybe if I had more free time... Increasing the detail of an audit trail doesnt mean anyone will automatically use the information in an effective manner.
This is why we need an Internet Mail Services Association in which email operators set standards and agree on how to operate the Internet email transport system. This group would have the goal of providing a high quality email service to all users. If that quality standard includes maintaining and using an audit trail, then the association members will do so. You cannot solve email operational problems by purely technical means. --Michael Dillon
Current thread:
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Michael . Dillon (Feb 28)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Michael . Dillon (Feb 28)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Steven M. Bellovin (Feb 28)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Nils Ketelsen (Feb 28)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Valdis . Kletnieks (Feb 28)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Nils Ketelsen (Mar 01)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Frank Louwers (Mar 01)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Nils Ketelsen (Mar 01)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 01)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Valdis . Kletnieks (Feb 28)
- Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587? Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 01)