My point exactly, I am perfectly happy authenticating and relaying through either my MX at the office or with Google's SMTP server. But I just can't do that if SMTPoSSL ports are blocked by some lazy net admin.
And I definitely hate it when I have to "pay" (in terms of delay and overhead) the price of a VPN in order to just send a couple of emails. cheers Carlos On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Dennis Burgess <dmburg...@linktechs.net> wrote: > >> >> I'm curious how a traveller is supposed to get SMTP relay service when, well, >> travelling. I am not really sure if I want a VPN for sending a simple email. >> >> And I can understand (although I am not convinced that doing so is such a >> great idea) blocking 25/tcp outgoing, as most botnets will try that method of >> delivery. However, I do believe that outgoing 465 SHOULD always be >> allowed. >> >> regards >> >> Carlos >> > > [dmb] This is the exact question, why, do you NEED a SMTP Relay on ANY > network. Your domain has a mail server out on the net that if you > authenticate to, I am sure will relay your mail, and the reverse DNS and SPF > records would match then as well. Why does the local internet provide NEED > to relay though their server, regardless of the port. > >> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Bjørn Mork <bj...@mork.no> wrote: >> > Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> writes: >> > >> >> It's both unacceptable in my opinion and common. There are even those >> >> misguided souls that will tell you it is best practice, though >> >> general agreement, even among them seems to be that only 25/tcp >> >> should be blocked and that >> >> 465 and 587 should not be blocked. >> > >> > It is definitely considered best practice in some areas. See e.g. >> > http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&u=http://ikt-norge.no/wp-c >> > ontent/uploads/2010/10/bransjenorm-SPAM.pdf >> > (couldn't find an english original, but the google translation looks >> > OK) >> > >> > The document is signed by all major ISPs in Norway as well as the >> > Norwegian research and education network operator, so it must be >> > considered a local "best practice" whether you like it or not. >> > >> > Note that only port 25/tcp is blocked and that some of the ISPs offer >> > a per-subscriber optout. >> > >> > Eh, this was the Northern Aurope NOG, wasn't it? >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Bjørn >> > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> -- >> ========================= >> Carlos M. Martinez-Cagnazzo >> http://www.labs.lacnic.net >> ========================= > > > -- -- ========================= Carlos M. Martinez-Cagnazzo http://www.labs.lacnic.net =========================
