Re^8: Net::SMTP::SSL ACK!!

This is not about modern TLS vs. old SSL. Net::SMTP::SSL vs. Net::SMTP::TLS is about implicit SSL/TLS (i.e. SMTPS, port 465) vs. explicit SSL/TLS (STARTTLS, port 25 or 587). And to add more to this naming confusion: TLS is actually just the new name for SSL, i.e. TLS 1.0 is SSL 3.1, TLS 1.2 is SSL version 3.3 etc. SSL 2.0 on the other hand is a very different protocol. This means that when somebody is talking about SSL or TLS or SSL/TLS they usually mean the same, except when they are talking about specific versions of the protocol.

I personally would suggest to use new versions of Net::SMTP (starting with libnet 3.x) which now has support for both explicit and implicit SSL/TLS and also for IPv6 - how it should have been from the start. Thus all the various derivates like Net::SMTP::SSL, Net::SMTP::TLS (buggy and unmaintained since 2006), Net::SMTP::TLS::ButMaintained (unmaintained since 2013), Net::SMTPS are finally no longer needed.

Comment on Re^8: Net::SMTP::SSL ACK!!

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^9: Net::SMTP::SSL ACK!! by jcb (Parson) on Feb 01, 2016 at 03:27 UTC
I agree with your suggestion to simply use the newer module with integrated support, but the questioner seems to be making an explicit distinction "I can fall back to TLS, but it would be nice to have it work with SSL", so I decided to point out that "SSL" might not actually be what is wanted.	[reply]
Re^10: Net::SMTP::SSL ACK!! by Dandello (Monk) on Feb 01, 2016 at 22:35 UTC
Ah so. So - What I really need is to make sure the version of Net::SMTP on the server is a current one so I don't need to worry about the TLS/SSL distinction and write to that. I should have been more clear, I guess. I'm in the slow process of updating some legacy web software. The 'original' code used Net::SMTP::TLS which was probably a shiny new Module when the code in that section was originally written. Now, off to rewrite some code using Net::SMTP and not worrying about Net::SMTP::TLS ...	[reply]