https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6085
[email protected] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |software+spamassassin@kd6lv | |w.ampr.org --- Comment #11 from [email protected] 2011-04-05 02:24:41 EDT --- Re - Spamcop reporting hardcoded to port 587 (or any hardcoded port)? Why is that a problem? The standard URL construct and syntax provides for a port number designation for other than the "standard" port of a particular service for a protocol. Therefore, a "mailto:"; URL should be able to support a port number designation that should be also be understood by a standard MSA. Whether or not this was specifically done for the mailto URL type will require a review of STD 10 and the various RFCs, and if not specified, it should be added. As for port 25 being blocked, why would that happen? If someone is operating an MTA, they will already have port 25 available (incoming), and if port 25 outbound is blocked, they're running an MTA when they shouldn't be (e.g. an ISP customer, especially those with dynamic IP assignments). Therefore, I don't consider that a problem which needs addressing. What needs to be checked is this: Does the current SA construct allow multiple addresses? If so, then nothing need be changed. Otherwise, SA must construct a submission list looping through the CSV (comma separated values), delivering a copy to each. Unfortunately, the local MSA cannot be used - else a recursive operation with no termination may result. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
