On Tuesday 17 June 2003 02:55 pm, Chad and Shaun Horton wrote:
> The bright folks at Cox have struck us with another one of their
> brilliant ideas again. Apparently the Cox put a jimmy hat on port 25.
> Do you have an smtp server and also subscribe to Cox (http://www.cox.com
> and http://www.cox.net)? Well, you poor sap. You are no longer allowed
> to send email through your smtp server because Cox, in their infinite
> wisdom, has now blocked port 25. This includes both servers within your
> local network AND hosted by an external provider.
>
> There has yet to be a supporting argument providing a realistic reason
> why they started blocking port 25. (below is a poor explanation from
> cox, which you can also read at
> http://support.cox.net/custsup/email/email_info.shtml)
>
> Now, this may not be that big of a deal for some, since you can still
> route all of your email through Cox's smtp server, but just the mere
> fact that they would do something so ludicrous should tick everyone off.

Far from ludicrous, I think this is a great idea.  Their explanation is 
dead-on for why something like this is necessary.  This should cut down on 
outgoing SPAM and virii quite a bit.

Now their implementation leaves something to be desired.  They really should 
have fully authenticated SSL enabled SMTP...  but ce'st la vie.

What about it, specifically, ticks you off so much?