<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [PATCH] ME's SMTP relay patch ported to CVS



On Tuesday, 06 September 2005 at 15:41, Charles Cazabon wrote:
> Brendan Cully <brendan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I think this would just cause confusion, until port 587 is widely
> > deployed by ISPs. I think most other MUAs still refer to SMTP servers
> > in their configuration directives anyway.
> 
> Only broken ones.  submission/587 is the future for MUAs which insist on
> speaking a network protocol to send mail -- ISPs also like it because it's
> easier to impose limits on submitted mail that you wouldn't necessarily impose
> on mail-in-transit.

I'd like to agree, but I haven't seen evidence of any large ISPs
turning on port 587 for their relay servers. Until they do, we'd be
doomed to a deluge of "why won't mutt connect to my mail server?
thunderbird works fine!" complaints.

This patch is inherently populist and pragmatic. If it were some
PGP/MIME option I'd be much happier to stick with the obscure RFC :)

Attachment: pgpKd5DO9xRjz.pgp
Description: PGP signature