On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 06:41:42PM +0100, Julian Bond wrote: > Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >However, many hotspots block outgoing connections to *anyone's* port 25, > >which was the topic sentence of (at least part of) this thread. > > As do some ISPs. This is broken and I blame Microsoft ;-) It should be > perfectly reasonable for me to connect to my private SMTP server on port > 25, issue a STARTTLS, authenticate and use it. But that's hard for them > to check. Blocking port 25 to prevent random virus driven connections is > an inevitability. Generally, they don't block port 465 yet so I can use > smtps instead. > > For hotspots though, what do they recommend the customers use for SMTP > then? Or did we do that one.
Well, they don't, so far as I know. I think that's a "power-user" issue... and who would expect *them* to be using hotspots? :-} I'd like to see pervasive real-time spamosity-checking/tar-pitting on the top 20 ISP incoming mail servers; I'm pretty sure that would end the spam problem in a month. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Florida http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 OS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows -- Simon Slavin, on a.f.c -- general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
