Re: Fully spam/virus filtered mail, and reliable outbound relay
From: Frank Slootweg (this_at_ddress.is.invalid)
Date: 06/12/04
- Next message: Ian Stirling: "Re: Convert ATX PSU to run on 192V DC rail"
- Previous message: Kevin R: "Re: Monitoring the status of a battery (or batteries in a series)"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Leythos: "Re: Fully spam/virus filtered mail, and reliable outbound relay"
- Next in thread: Leythos: "Re: Fully spam/virus filtered mail, and reliable outbound relay"
- Reply:(deleted message) Leythos: "Re: Fully spam/virus filtered mail, and reliable outbound relay"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 12 Jun 2004 14:04:01 GMT
Leythos <void@nowhere.com> wrote:
> In article <40cabd94$1$149$18b6e80@news.wanadoo.nl>,
> this@ddress.is.invalid says...
> > > Blocking outbound 25 is not hindering anyone, you can still send through
> > > your ISP's server. If you wanted a unrestricted internet connection you
> > > should have bought business class service.
> >
> > So in your opinion it is OK if mail From: <user>@<not_my_ISP>.<tld> is
> > sent from/by IPs which are <host>.<my_ISP>.<tld>?
>
> No, it's not "OK", but that's your only choice while using a residential
> account.
>
> > To me that looks (potentially) 'spammy' and I could well imagine that
> > it would look spammmy to others and that those other would block/reject/
> > <whatever> my (legit) mail. What do others think of this?
[deleted]
> If your ISP is blocking SMTP (FTP, etc...) this is must be in their
> TOS/AUP that they can do it and that you are not to be running
> servers/services as such. The only thing you can do is switch ISP's or
> get a business class service.
FWIW, my ISP closed outbound port 25 *after* I signed up with them. Of
course such 'details' were not documented anywhere, so there was little
I could do (other than, with many others, complain, with zero result).
> Now, on the other hand, I see many people that have domain names for
> their email address that they own - the email is forwarded from the
> domain name hoster to any address they want, when they reply they use
> the SMTP server of the ISP that they have - the domain name hoster does
> not provide SMTP service for those accounts. Sure, if you look at the
> headers and such you can see that email sent to someone@mycompany.com is
> being responded to someoneelse@someisp.com, but, is it really a problem?
No I have no problem with *that*, but that was not what I mentioned:
I meant that the domain in the From: *address* of my messages does not
match the domain of the *IPs* used to send those messages (i.e. my IP
and my ISPs mailserver's IP).
I understand what you are saying, but I think it is idiotic that well-
behaving people like me have to fork out the money for a "business class
service", because ISPs can not be bothered to take action against (only)
the offenders/clueless (i.e. the people with infected machines. As Barry
mentioned, at least one ISP has seen the light. Sadly it is not one I
can use.
As things are, I'll just have to live with it and accept the risk that
some of my messages get bounced, or worse, silently dropped.
My apologies to the OP, Jem Berkes, for spoiling his thread with all
this off-topic stuff. At some stage(s) I/we should have changed the
Subject:, but I/we didn't. Sorry.
- Next message: Ian Stirling: "Re: Convert ATX PSU to run on 192V DC rail"
- Previous message: Kevin R: "Re: Monitoring the status of a battery (or batteries in a series)"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Leythos: "Re: Fully spam/virus filtered mail, and reliable outbound relay"
- Next in thread: Leythos: "Re: Fully spam/virus filtered mail, and reliable outbound relay"
- Reply:(deleted message) Leythos: "Re: Fully spam/virus filtered mail, and reliable outbound relay"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
