Could you please tell me if we have some mailing list ready to organize
some kind of struggle against this kind of insanities which are starting
to plague the internet?
I don't know of one. I think it is a worthy cause, but I am
overloaded already so I cannot take the lead here.
> People need to express their views in other situations--when a site
> decides to *use* mail-abuse.org and block mail from dynamic sites.
> Is Debian doing anything like this?
Could you please tell me if we have some mailing list ready to organize
some kind of struggle against this kind of insani
I don't like this either. However, I don't think that expressing
anger at whoever runs mail-abuse.org will be effective. He is not likely
to listen to us.
People need to express their views in other situations--when a site
decides to *use* mail-abuse.org and block mail from dynamic sites.
Is Deb
>>"Remi" == Remi Lefebvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Remi> Your ISP hopefully provides a relay for your outgoing mail,
Remi> which relay accepts your mail based on your IP (should accept
Remi> only mail from its clients). Why can't you use that one ?
The operative word is hopefully
>>"Alan" == Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alan> The usual response to this is
Alan> "Your ISP gives you a mailserver through which to relay mail. Set a
Alan> smarthost and get over it."
Alan> Why isn't that sufficient for you?
This seems a particularly naive world view.
>>"Alan" == Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alan> Gary Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Do they? I can name at least one which may not (depending on the
>> tarif you choose).
Alan> If you have an ISP who doesn't provide a mail server for you but
Alan> provides you with a DUL-li
That's a pretty valid point Roberto.. That is why I learned how to use/build
radio! I see more and more of this repression & censorship everyday. I
shudder to think what it is like for our debian brothers and sisters in
nations where you can't legally even surf the internet for NEWS! It will ge
On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 12:54:01PM -0400, Alan Shutko wrote:
> Roberto Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > They want to block the whole IP's which are dynamic so they can not
> > send mail anymore so every guy in the internet will have to depend
> > upon a third-party mail relay to send mail..
On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 12:54:01PM -0400, Alan Shutko wrote:
> Roberto Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > They want to block the whole IP's which are dynamic so they can not
> > send mail anymore so every guy in the internet will have to depend
> > upon a third-party mail relay to send mail..
> If you find an actual case like this, I'd bet that MAPS would take
> that range off the list.
I bet we will never know.. thats always the case with poor people nobody
wants to know about them.
> But you won't be bothered by reality, since you care about the
> principle of the thing.
Principl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Godwin's Razor has been invoked: second warning.
On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Roberto Diaz wrote:
>> I have no idea why you cc'd this email to debian-user, since Debian does
>> NOT rely on the DUL as part of our spam-blocking setup.
>
>Because there are some
> I have no idea why you cc'd this email to debian-user, since Debian does
> NOT rely on the DUL as part of our spam-blocking setup.
Because there are some human beings here.. people who are ready to fully
understand the stupid and dangerous of using DUL.
Just think.. you only have to break the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I invoke Godwin's razor and declare this thread dead! Fascism has been
mentioned, EOT.
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Roberto Diaz wrote:
>
>And I insist that what you are doing with dynamic ip's has a
>name.. FASCISM.
>
>Sorry very much but this is the true.
Roberto Diaz wrote:
> By blocking the whole dynamic segment of the internet you are
> not a solution anymore but a part of the problem.
I have no idea why you cc'd this email to debian-user, since Debian does
NOT rely on the DUL as part of our spam-blocking setup.
Of course, I don't know why you
Roberto Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Think for example in a lot of third-world countries maybe in some places
> they could be using dynamic DNS as the only way to have multiple e-mail
> for everybody in a small village.. they maybe only can afford a dial-up
> connection...
If you find an ac
> If you have an ISP who doesn't provide a mail server for you but
> provides you with a DUL-listed IP, that's your fault.
Please.. there are a lot of combinations.. a lot of countries a lot of
realities.. you can have no chance to choose a ISP who provides you
SMTP/POP and is not your fault..
An
Nate Amsden writes:
> ISPs don't take the responsibility most of the time to restrict outgoing
> mail to their servers(ive worked at a few so i know this from the
> inside), dynamic ips should NOT be allowed to send mail, there should be
> stuff in the router or firewall or whatever to prevent this
Gary Jones writes:
> Do they? I can name at least one which may not (depending on the tarif
> you choose). They might provide a newsserver as well, but it doesn't mean
> you are forced to use it, either to read or post.
This is true. You can contract with anyone you want to for either news or
mai
Gary Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Do they? I can name at least one which may not (depending on the
> tarif you choose).
If you have an ISP who doesn't provide a mail server for you but
provides you with a DUL-listed IP, that's your fault.
--
Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - In a varie
Roberto Diaz wrote:
>
> I am sending this here because according to mail-abuse.org I and the whole
> dynamic dns users are spammers just because we are using dynamic ip's.
> I want all the debian mail relay's administrators be very aware about
> this.
can't win it all. the amount of spam blocked
On 3 Apr 2001, Alan Shutko wrote:
> Roberto Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > They want to block the whole IP's which are dynamic so they can not
> > send mail anymore so every guy in the internet will have to depend
> > upon a third-party mail relay to send mail
[..]
> "Your ISP gives you a
Dont thank God for being such a coward..
> Thank God for procmail!
>
> :0
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> /dev/null/
>
> Bye
>
> Glyn M
Regards
Roberto
Roberto Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://vivaldi.dhis.org
Power
Thank God for procmail!
:0
* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/dev/null/
Bye
Glyn M
> Just citing "a principle" is _not_ enough to change the MAPS folks'
> minds. That's why it isn't sufficient for me.
So do you think is ok to treat to put the complete dynamic ip segment into
a black list?
Maybe is because I am getting old,, but in the 80's (when I was
young) this would have be
> The problem you are having, Roberto, as nothing to do with DDT but with
> you being on a dynamic connection. The truth is a static connection is
> much better suited for servers, but it is possible to run a server on a
> dynamic connection (much more affordable). One downside is some people
> wil
Hi,
Ok, let's that get everything clear.
DDT provides DNS services. Not mail services. However, there's a relation
between mail and DNS as far as mail routing go (read about MX records for
more). We do not provide any kind of SMTP services for DDT users whatsoever.
Now, why would someone want to
Roberto Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am telling about a principle.. nobody should put the entire dynamic
> internet segment into a black list..
>
> Why isn't is this sufficient for you?
Because the Internet has changed, and most people either don't care
about the DUL, or think it's a go
> "Your ISP gives you a mailserver through which to relay mail. Set a
> smarthost and get over it."
> Why isn't that sufficient for you?
I am telling about a principle.. nobody should put the entire dynamic
internet segment into a black list..
Why isn't is this sufficient for you?
Regards
Ro
> If you absolutely want to run a real server, geez, get a real connection.
I was using ddt for mail.. and for nothing else.. if you dont want me to
use it.. OK but dont lie.. in your site you had specific instructions
about how to run a mail server using ddt.
Now I really dont advise anybody to
Roberto Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> They want to block the whole IP's which are dynamic so they can not
> send mail anymore so every guy in the internet will have to depend
> upon a third-party mail relay to send mail.. whats the next?
The usual response to this is
"Your ISP gives you a
Roberto,
Your IP is listed in the DUL list because it is in a dynamic IP range. There's
nothing to whine about there since it really does belong in that list.
The point to argue about is whether it is wise for relays to block based on
the DUL. My personal opinion is its an inneficient way of file
And I insist that what you are doing with dynamic ip's has a
name.. FASCISM.
Sorry very much but this is the true.. spammers always will find
a work-around since they have nothing better to do with their lifes.
By blocking the whole dynamic segment of the internet you are
not a solution anymor
I am sending this here because according to mail-abuse.org I and the whole
dynamic dns users are spammers just because we are using dynamic ip's.
I want all the debian mail relay's administrators be very aware about
this.
They want to block the whole IP's which are dynamic so they can not send
m
33 matches
Mail list logo