At 06:46 PM 6/13/2003 -0500, you wrote: >On 2003.06.13 16:18 Dustin Puryear wrote: > > At 04:38 PM 6/13/2003 -0500, you wrote: > > > > So you want to keep the Internet wide open, but you don't want it to be > > easy for people to send spam. Got it. :) > >Got what, a straw man? I never said that. I think it should be easy for >people to send mail. Breaking up the network will destroy it's value and >punish everyone for the actions of a guilty few.
I don't get the straw man reference to be honest. Anyway, yes, in the past you (and everyone else here, myself included) have complained about spam. A common way to reduce the amount of incoming spam you have to deal with is to not allow accept mail directly from a dial-up, DSL, or modem user. There is going to be a compromise between how easily anyone on the Internet can send mail, and the wish of my networks to reduce the amount of their incoming spam. I don't see what is so hard about relaying your mail through Cox. >What it boils down to is that they are too cheap, lazy or scared of >Microshaft to do anything but block port 25 outbound. Cox can easily and >instantly terminate their contract with someone who spams. They can get >in touch with them and warn them I was specifically addressing the issue that was raised about some mail servers not accepting mail from systems connected via cable, DSL, or dial-up. --- Dustin Puryear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Puryear Information Technology Windows, UNIX, and IT Consulting http://www.puryear-it.com
