nanog mailing list archives
Re: Lazy network operators
From: Petri Helenius <pete () he iki fi>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 12:17:47 +0300
Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
That was solved 6 years ago. You let them use port 587 instead of 25. http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2476.html
How many MUAs default to port 587? How many even know about 587 and give it as an option other than fill-in-the-blank?
...back to the computer literacy requirement again... How many support calls you get by requiring 587 instead of 25? Pete
Current thread:
- Re: Lazy network operators, (continued)
- Re: Lazy network operators Iljitsch van Beijnum (Apr 16)
- Re: Lazy network operators Petri Helenius (Apr 16)
- Re: Lazy network operators Paul Jakma (Apr 17)
- Re: Lazy network operators Paul Vixie (Apr 17)
- Re: Lazy network operators Kurt Erik Lindqvist (Apr 20)
- RE: Lazy network operators Stephen J. Wilcox (Apr 14)
- Re: Lazy network operators Petri Helenius (Apr 14)
- Re: Lazy network operators Alex Bligh (Apr 14)
- Re: Lazy network operators John Curran (Apr 14)
- Re: Lazy network operators Todd Vierling (Apr 14)
- Re: Lazy network operators Joe Abley (Apr 14)
- Re: Lazy network operators Joe Abley (Apr 14)