From: "Brian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: METROCAST BLOCKS RESIDENTIAL E-MAIL Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 16:20:40 -0500
I think there is a reason the OP put OUTBOUND in all caps. This isn't about running your own SMTP server at home, it's about using a non-Metrocast SMTP server to SEND mail to others. Exactly. *My* MTA doesn't allow connections from non-local hosts. But in certainly expects email to be available on port 25 on the Internet.... And, since RFC 822 was one of the earliest Internet standards, people have kinda grown to depend on it... If someone I correspond with wants to MX all their incoming mail through their ISP's mail server, that's their choice and their right. But I shouldn't be forced, by *my* ISP, to add an extra server hop to *every* email message I send. In the last 10 years I've been actively using an internet connection, I've *never* used my ISP's mail servers. I've always had my own domain(s) hosted somewhere, and sent emails through my own servers. Given what Metroca$t has done, your setup would not work from my location. You'd have to configure your MX on a non-standard port, because the traffic between my feed and the MX (even if you own it!) would be squelched by my I$P. Sending an email through your own/alternate server should not be prevented. I have to say Amen! to that... But I have to take it one step further: Sending an email through your own/alternate server should not be prevented, *just because your ISP does not consider you a business*. Implicit in their restriction of outbound traffic is the insinuation that residential customers do not deserve real, uncensored, access to the Internet. Since the filtering of port 25 does not exist on so-called "business" accounts, this policy further implies that only businesses are entitled to unrestricted *Internet* access. From: Christopher Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org Subject: Re: METROCAST BLOCKS RESIDENTIAL E-MAIL Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 16:21:24 -0500 said most. And I stand by that statement: The number of zombie windows boxes on any given network is likely higher than the number of persons working from home on the network. Minority does not imply unimportance. I'm probably the only person in the state of New Hampshire who can speak the language Lojban. That doesn't mean I shouldn't be allowed to speak it. http://www.lojban.org From: Python <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 16:29:37 -0500 That's really just an excuse for not knowing the customers and their needs. Port blocking, inbound and outbound can be a legitimate part of the service. Inbound blocking provides a firewall. Outbound blocking In fact, email is *such* an integral part of the Internet, I have to ask if, by filtering 25out, they are breaking their obligation to provide something called "Internet access". protects the "neighborhood" from incompetence. However, the Right. But that's not my incompetence, and they're blocking *me*. If they blocked 25out per-IP, I'd be fine with that. If I erroneously got filtered, I could call and have the block removed. But assuming that all your customers are incompetent is arrogant and prejudicial, not to mention rude. unwillingness to customize and tailor the service to fit customer needs is mostly laziness and the expectation that they can get away with it. It's that latter part... "the expectation that they can get away with it" that I intend to prove wrong. And I believe together, we can make them realize their mistake (and correct it). _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss