Is there really any advantage of switching to port 587?

[voyager62]

What advantage is there in switching to port 587?  It has always been defined as the SMTP alternate port: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1838667,00.asp, so any good spammer would check port 587 if port 25 isn't open.  It doesn't say that SSL is even required for port 587, so anyone can use it, even spammers that already know it's the SMTP alternate port.

Since you could simply use SSL with port 25, all you're doing is confusing the less tech savvy users by completely disabling their email.

This change disables my older Netgear router from emailing me the security logs since the port isn't configurable.

It will also disable consumer devices, like security equipment and cameras that notify the owner via email when an event happens.

I think that's the real purpose.  Verizon is forcing people to pay extra for a static IP to be able to use port 25 to send email, "If you subscribe to a static IP address service, you will not be affected. Static IP packages are sold as an upgraded service." Soon Verizon will make everything ala carte like with cable and satellite TV.  You want to use port 21 for ftp, 119 for nntp or 25 for smtp; that will be $5.99 a month each.

So what does blocking port 25 actually accomplish for the rest of us?

[dslr595148]

Reminder:

Not only you do not need to change the port if you have a Static IP...

You do not need to do it, for..

#1 Any e-mail that you send using your web browser

#2 Any e-mail account that you have with Verizon.

I am not sure, but I know this is either user@verizon.net or user@verion.com.

--

Anyways: I know that is an attempt to stop spam, but I know that spammers will find a way around it (even, as you said)

Even with SSL, they will find a way around it too.

[djarum]

That's really not a particularly useful comment, as it really ignores what voyager62 is saying and restates some mostly useless info.